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

My Ultimate Synth and the continued journey
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> Eurorack Modules  
Author My Ultimate Synth and the continued journey
2disbetter
As I've kind of always alluded to an Ultimate Synth of sorts, which is to some extent subjective, and because I genuinely would like to hear about how I could improve it, where I might be wrong, etc. I thought I'd post my concept here. So this is the current state:



So why am I calling this the ultimate synth?
Like probably many of you, the idea of being surrounded by various synth makes and models is something I think is awesome. However, the thinker in me has always longed for the perfect interface and unlimited sound sculpting options. Today many people accomplish this by just using an assortment of synths, either physical or software in nature. While great in so many ways, it is also frustrating. Each synth has a different interface, different limitations, and different strengths. I think although the options presented by such an approach are plentiful, they are not truly unlimited. (either at sound sculpting or with regard to the modulation options.)

So if you want to have it all with the least amount of limitations (outside of interface limitations), a DAW with a slew of plugins, and a beefy system is arguably the most powerful and limitless solution. However, even in software there are always limitations, and not every plugin works intuitively with the whole system or at all. There is also the issue of workflow and interface. Having all the options in the world and no way to really harness doesn’t really do much for you. This is one of the primary draws for me about modular synthesis. I can route signals from where ever to whatever. I can do things that many software plug-ins have never thought about.
Enter the physical hardware synth. A lot of them are analog, and all of them boast of how their physical controls make it possible to focus on using the device instead of learning it. Still they are usually constricted by their physical limitations despite the best efforts to create them to be used in as many ways as possible.

I label a synth as the ultimate synth, if it presents to me the most options for sound design and ways to control and use that sound. I also call it a synth, singular in nature, because I feel like having one instrument allows you to focus on it, and can therefore master it much better than trying to remember a billion different settings and knobs across a host of synths in your studio. This is why I moved into the modular synth world to begin with. On a modular system you can route things in ways that software plugins, in some cases, have never even thought about. You also are dealing with one system, that is comprised of many different parts, but that operate as a whole.

A purely analog modular system is powerful, but expensive, and to really be near limitless, very large, and not in anyway easy or intuitive to use. (This is not a problem for me. Options means depth, and that usually translates into complexity.) Just think about the time it takes to patch up a 9-12U. Now imagine a whole wall. Seems like heaven, and it is, but this time takes away from creativity and can also make one afraid to take chances. Do you really want to mess with the patch? It is perfect now, are you sure you want to reroute this or change this?

Digital modules however allow the modular world to do things in a space that isn’t always possible in a fully analog implementation. All digital modules are employing DSP. All of them play by the same rules in terms of what is going on behind the scenes. And lest we forget, digital modules allow you to do things also not possible in the analog realm.

This is why the SSP is the nexus of my setup. It can do anything that can be done in DSP, and because of the horsepower under the hood it can do it in multiples across many different types of DSP simultaneously. I have analog oscillators, filters, modulation sources, and VCAs. The SSP helps to take advantage of all of it, and give me an infinite range of things I can do with them. The SSP gives my whole rack wings.

I can also sample in any of my modules and multiply them in the system through the SSP. As I swap out oscillators and filters, looking for the ones I really like, I will be able to keep it all through the samples I’ve taken. This means that as my system changes but stays the same size (maybe) my rack just continues to grow with every sample and patch saved. I can do this on the 301 as well, but as it's sample resolution is lower, I tend to use it for VCA, filtering, and some effects on background sounds, etc.
This functionality is an important part of the instrument. However being able to control it in the most comprehensive and tactile manner was an important element for me as well. Where some see the modules controls as the solution to this, I've never found a module that I felt I could play in the same way I could a piano, etc. Some of the things I’ve been able to coax out of my analog modules sound great already. But being able to control them as I would an acoustic instrument lets this synthetic sound (in some cases) breathe with life and feeling.

In my rack, the FH-2 allow me to plug in a host of controllers (Roli, Haken, Linnstrument, sequencers, DAWs) as a means to control modules and can really help me just build up massive sounds and soundscapes and take advantage of that range of control.

Of course these controllers can be plugged into the SSP directly via its USB host ports. I can use the SSP as a midi to cv converter. This means that the SSP can host these controllers and supports MPE functionality directly and out of the box without needing the FH-2! What I’ve done in these cases is plugged in a roli and used most of the parameters internally, but have routed the release or Y axis to an an output on the SSP to be used on other modules in the system. Very powerful routing options, and just incredible to be able to put this control right where I need it. I personally prefer to use the high resolution/sample rate outputs of the SSP for audio output or modulation signals though, so that is why I also have the FH-2 module.
Because of this, Ladytron, my eurorack setup, is my ultimate synth. There isn’t anything I can’t do with it, and even more so that I wont be able to do with it eventually as more and more modules are developed for the SSP.
One thing I think I should probably mention again is that the SSP is the main hub of this ‘vision’. The reason for this even though I have a ER-301 is that the SSP just has the horsepower (about 10 times the horse power of the 301) to help the system as a whole to shine.

With 16 DC coupled inputs (rather than AC coupled) I can use the inputs for audio, CV, and gates. The recorder on the SSP can sample all 16 inputs (regardless of the type of signal) as well as all of the 8 outputs (also DC coupled and able to output CV,audio, or triggers) and all internal signals. With the SDK it possible to extend the SSP continually. Right now I think I'm only one of a few actually working to develop modules. I would love it if more picked it up, because I think the cost value ratio on the SSP is through the roof and any development on it just increases that.

The upgrade-able nature means that as features mount, processing power can always march right along even though it is already super powerful. Direct control over MIDI through the USB connections to include MPE means that I don’t have to use my inputs for control if I don’t want to. This flexibility just means the SSP is poised to do whatever I need. Whether that is some super massive front line role, or some low key background helper. This whole ultimate synth would not be possible without the SSP.
Thoughts? Do you have any suggestions? Please remember this is just the logic I use. I'm not trying to say some other way is wrong. While I've created what I think is the lushest field for me to explore, I am still completely at the beginning of discovering all that the nearly infinite field contains.



This is the current iteration:

Details can be found through out the thread here. I will add, that getting the system to be as small as possible has always been a design goal.
southberry
I think the Tip Top oscillators can be swapped with 4 different oscillators that are less than 14HP and more sonic options. I will make room for another small and ultra powerful module like a micro Ornament & Crime for example ...

whatever ! it's a really beautiful instrument applause
acidbob
There is a certain advantage of having 4 of the same VCO's I would say
JohnLRice
love Beautiful and powerful system, congrats! SlayerBadger! thumbs up

What are the system's power requirements? I was surprised that you have 4 Row Power 40's in there but I guess with that many power hungry digital modules that it was necessary?
2disbetter
JohnLRice wrote:
love Beautiful and powerful system, congrats! SlayerBadger! thumbs up

What are the system's power requirements? I was surprised that you have 4 Row Power 40's in there but I guess with that many power hungry digital modules that it was necessary?


There is excessive power there. The main reason for it, is I like being able to turn on rows versus the whole thing ALL the time.

The whole rack goes through 3 LIBB boards (HIGHLY recommend) and 4 row power 40s. I'm using too makewell 60watt bricks with it. The SSP is on it's own row power as it uses around 800mA, and there are many times I just want to use it. (for tweaking a patch, for example)

Power is rock solid, clean, and quite after a long and troubled road.
BenA718
Great system and control options!
potatobrain
Wow, really great wall of text.
Can you please elaborate a little on the way you're using Haken's MPE functionality here? Can you transform all the MIDI messages from Haken into cv?
That's actually what I'm also aiming to achieve now with Poly and 4xMangroves.
melodydad
Love the Tip Top oscillators - I have three - as combined you have quite a lot of ‘complex oscillator’ options - but recommend you have an attenuator nearby to get the best out of the waveshapers. thumbs up
JohnLRice
2disbetter wrote:
JohnLRice wrote:
love Beautiful and powerful system, congrats! SlayerBadger! thumbs up

What are the system's power requirements? I was surprised that you have 4 Row Power 40's in there but I guess with that many power hungry digital modules that it was necessary?


There is excessive power there. The main reason for it, is I like being able to turn on rows versus the whole thing ALL the time.

The whole rack goes through 3 LIBB boards (HIGHLY recommend) and 4 row power 40s. I'm using too makewell 60watt bricks with it. The SSP is on it's own row power as it uses around 800mA, and there are many times I just want to use it. (for tweaking a patch, for example)

Power is rock solid, clean, and quite after a long and troubled road.
Thanks for the info and congrats on getting it all setup well! thumbs up

If you are up for a little soldering and some crimping to you can interconnect your Row Power pairs behind the panels if you want. The Row Power 30 and 40 supplies have points on the PCBs where you could just solder wires between them to eliminate the external barrel plug cables:


But those points are more designed for quick connect tabs to be soldered in like the below:


And then the modules would be connected with short quick connect cables you would make or buy:


I also like to cover the unused barrel jacks with rubber protective covers . . .probably unnecessary but give me peace of mind. hihi
http://www.networktechinc.com/cgi-bin/keemux/cvr-dcf55-10.html
2disbetter
Thanks JohnLRice, the barrel connector covers are a great idea!

Daisy chaining them through the back would be nice, but would only work for 2 of the row powers, because the other 2 are in individual 3U skiffs. You would also loose the ability to quickly disconnect power to a row completely. Pro and Cons on both sides really.
JohnLRice
2disbetter wrote:
Thanks JohnLRice, the barrel connector covers are a great idea!

Daisy chaining them through the back would be nice, but would only work for 2 of the row powers, because the other 2 are in individual 3U skiffs. You would also loose the ability to quickly disconnect power to a row completely. Pro and Cons on both sides really.
Yeah, it's not something most people would want to do but it's just a little nicer when it makes sense, IMHO. cool
2disbetter
potatobrain wrote:
Wow, really great wall of text.
Can you please elaborate a little on the way you're using Haken's MPE functionality here? Can you transform all the MIDI messages from Haken into cv?
That's actually what I'm also aiming to achieve now with Poly and 4xMangroves.


Currently through the FH-2, but the SSP can interface directly with it as well. The Haken comes with a Midi to USB dongle from Roland. I'm just beginning to experiment with the Continuum though.

The Roli works fine through the FH-2 as well. I love how you can configure the FH-2 to use however many cv and gates per voice/finger as you want.
natureclubcassettes
oof so many screens and menus. i counted 12 (not counting the tiptops). too much for me, but horses for courses.
jmax313
sweet synth setup. Makes me want to get an SSP...

how do you integrate your control forge in your system? had one for a while and dunno why I sold it..
gonkulator
Glad you have found your ultimate. I hope everyone is building (or has built) their ultimate synth too.
TheRosskonian
Nice post. Enjoyed reading all of that. I like all the multiples of the same modules. Adds a lot of functionality without too much complexity since you do not have to learn a new module. I cannot tell what those Doepfer modules are in the upper left-hand corner, but given the rest of your rack, I am guessing they are either envelopes or VCAs?

How is the ergonomics of this setup? I find myself wanting deeper modules such as Control Forge right in front of me for how much time I spend on them.
euxine
Nice post +1!

The kind of chat i hope to have when i go to superbooth later this year...
2disbetter
TheRosskonian wrote:
I cannot tell what those Doepfer modules are in the upper left-hand corner, but given the rest of your rack, I am guessing they are either envelopes or VCAs?


Those are A-111-3s (x 4). Nice as they can be used for LFO duties as well.

TheRosskonian wrote:
How is the ergonomics of this setup? I find myself wanting deeper modules such as Control Forge right in front of me for how much time I spend on them.


I have found that this is ok. I feel the same way as you, but with the number of complex modules there is just no way to have them all in front of me. I just move to have whatever I'm working on right in front of me with my seat. I think what would be the best is if the eurorack was mounted on the wall, but i'm renting so that is a no go. The rack folds though, so if I ever want to just focus on it, I can pick it up and move to the floor or another room.

As I use it more and more, I'm looking to shrink it. Would be great in just 3U 104hp, but 6U at 104hp will probably be the smallest I can go without really loosing capability.
TheRosskonian
2disbetter wrote:

As I use it more and more, I'm looking to shrink it. Would be great in just 3U 104hp, but 6U at 104hp will probably be the smallest I can go without really loosing capability.


There are a few modules you could replace to shrink it, HP wise. Those oscillators and LFOs being some easy examples of where you could find something more space efficient. Maybe even get a different case where the power switches do not take up any HP. You did not say what you use BitBox for, could one of the Octatracks not replace that?

But all of that is really getting down an endless path of optimizing HP for function. That really is one of the worst (and best) parts of Eurorack. Your options are only limited as your time and money. I almost feel bad even bringing it up since it looks like you have a complete already.
2disbetter
Well the only rule for me is that the modules have to be analog. Replacing them with a digital module doesn't make a ton of sense thanks to the SSP.

The tool box is a sequencer. It is just easier to sequence parts with CV using it versus the octatrack. Also the toolbox is able to take midi in via a 3.5 to midi din so it doubles as an interface for the octatrack.
2disbetter
I forgot to mention that while this is the final design of my setup, that the design includes changing out the analog sound sources/filters so as to broaden the overall collection of sounds it is capable of. This is hopefully the way it will be set up come this spring:



I'm a big fan of Rossum modules for a number of reasons, but from the things I've read and the videos I've seen on the Trident, I don't know of too many other oscillators with as much potential for the money. Really excited to see them materialize and get some more videos of it.
2disbetter
jmax313 wrote:
how do you integrate your control forge in your system? had one for a while and dunno why I sold it..


There are so many things you can do with the control forge. It is basically just a fantastic source of CV that can be used for anything. It's also quite possibly one of the most advanced envelopes available in eurorack. One thing I like to do is record the CV outputs from the two main outs (normal and inversed) on the SSP and then use that internally there to drive voices or modulation. All that is just scratching the surface. The CF is one module I just highly recommend; it's the reason I've never had a MATHS.
The Grump
The only thing I might possible change in that piece of awesome is swapping out the Satellite and Stages for an Assimil8or, simply because you can sample the output of the Control Forge to do the Satellite's or Stages jobs, plus you have a whole world of Rossum's sampling tools at your fingertips for thicker layers, found sounds, etc., with faster access to them than using a Disting, though that's no slight upon the Distings. I'm surprised that there's no MATHS in there, but the territory is pretty well covered otherwise. NICE FUCKING INSTRUMENT!!!
2disbetter
The Grump wrote:
The only thing I might possible change in that piece of awesome is swapping out the Satellite and Stages for an Assimil8or, simply because you can sample the output of the Control Forge to do the Satellite's or Stages jobs, plus you have a whole world of Rossum's sampling tools at your fingertips for thicker layers, found sounds, etc., with faster access to them than using a Disting, though that's no slight upon the Distings. I'm surprised that there's no MATHS in there, but the territory is pretty well covered otherwise. NICE FUCKING INSTRUMENT!!!


Thanks!

I do love Rossum modules! However as I have the SSP getting another sampler just doesn't make any sense. The SSP already has the highest sampling rate in eurorack and can sample all 16 DC coupled inputs and 8 DC coupled outputs at the same time at up to 192khz and 32 bits. You could sample just 1 or a few inputs as well. From the technical side of the house it is the ultimate sampler. Since the platform is open, the software feature set will just keep improving.

Stages and the satellite are redundant though...
The Grump
2disbetter wrote:
The Grump wrote:
The only thing I might possible change in that piece of awesome is swapping out the Satellite and Stages for an Assimil8or, simply because you can sample the output of the Control Forge to do the Satellite's or Stages jobs, plus you have a whole world of Rossum's sampling tools at your fingertips for thicker layers, found sounds, etc., with faster access to them than using a Disting, though that's no slight upon the Distings. I'm surprised that there's no MATHS in there, but the territory is pretty well covered otherwise. NICE FUCKING INSTRUMENT!!!


Thanks!

I do love Rossum modules! However as I have the SSP getting another sampler just doesn't make any sense. The SSP already has the highest sampling rate in eurorack and can sample all 16 DC coupled inputs and 8 DC coupled outputs at the same time at up to 192khz and 32 bits. You could sample just 1 or a few inputs as well. From the technical side of the house it is the ultimate sampler. Since the platform is open, the software feature set will just keep improving.

Stages and the satellite are redundant though...


Thanks for the info. Looks like you've got the sampling base pretty well covered.
2disbetter
So continuing my journey, I've downsized and removed some redundancies unless their UI was more important than minimizing.



What I might do is get a 4ms Pod or two and use them to add new elements to the instrument, using the SSP to capture what I can from them. The obvious first candidate for that would be the Trident. Just looks like a really juicy oscillator.

I can tell you that my enjoyment for using the modular has improved. I mean I enjoyed it before, but I had to be in the mood, which usually meant I had a lot of mental energy still available. I normally only get to sit down and wiggle in the evenings, and it happens often that I'm just tired from the day.

However with the new setup, I just want to mess with it. I really feel like I've dialed it all in. Like I've found my sonic zen.
jmax313
2disbetter wrote:
jmax313 wrote:
how do you integrate your control forge in your system? had one for a while and dunno why I sold it..


There are so many things you can do with the control forge. It is basically just a fantastic source of CV that can be used for anything. It's also quite possibly one of the most advanced envelopes available in eurorack. One thing I like to do is record the CV outputs from the two main outs (normal and inversed) on the SSP and then use that internally there to drive voices or modulation. All that is just scratching the surface. The CF is one module I just highly recommend; it's the reason I've never had a MATHS.


I did not even think about recording the CV especially since I did not have a way to record the CV when I owned it.. That gives me ideas now... And I'mm a huge fan of Rossum modules. Although dense, very easy to wrap my head around them.
hippasus
What a journey, thank you for sharing!
Zerius
What would be the major differences between your Percussa SSP and ER301?
They seem able to do lots of things and I was really impressed by the sound quality of the Percussa module from the recent videos the connector posted.

How much time did you take to dig into each modules?
Which one would you recommend me first smile
2disbetter
The SSP and 301 are effectively the same thing, implemented and with different constraints.

Both of the modules are not incredibly intuitive, but that's just because you can't have that kind of depth without that trade off. However, both have made great efforts to not make it tougher than necessary.

For doing little things, (so small patches) I would say they are both evenly matched. The SSP has the ability to sample and output at significantly higher resolution, and has 4 additional outputs. On top of that all of the outputs and inputs on the SSP are DC coupled and so they can handle audio or CV.

Where the SSP really shines (when viewed from the 301 perspective) is when you are creating larger more complicated patches. The UI is like looking at your eurorack in that sense. You layout modules as you would in your case and patch them up.

CPU wise the SSP is 10 times as powerful as the 301.

All that said, I sold my 301, and have ordered another one. As a companion to the SSP it is stellar. It is kind of like having a backup string section in a symphony.

As far as which one to recommend? If you can only have one, I would get the SSP. If you are space constrained, then a 301 is a fantastic module. However, once you understand the 301, and understand it's limitations, you'll probably start thinking about the SSP again.


thumbs up thumbs up
Zerius
Thanks you very much ! you have cleared my mind hihi

I should receive the ER301 in the next few weeks and since I don't have the space yet for the SSP I'm gonna wait until I master the 301.
I don't think I would be able to use all the SSP functionalities at the beginning and the 301 community is very active so I might find answers to my future questions hihi

I hope the SSP will get more popularity with more videos on youtube to really hear and see the true potential of this beast but so far it seems like a real concurrent to the 301 sonically talking !
potatobrain
Do you use Haken and Roli equally or prefer one over another?
2disbetter
That is a complicated question. hihi

In the beginning I was very impressed and interested in MPE related controllers. I thought (and still think) that they were one of the best things that could happen for synths. Playing a synth with the same control over the sound as a guitar player, for example, is a really compelling idea.

I wanted a Linnstrument first, but because I only ever played power chords, and never really learned how to play a guitar was turned off by the layout.

I learned how to play the piano as a kid, and that is what I was familiar with.

I always liked the Haken, but it was just so expensive, and I didn't see the price justifying the advantages it offered over the more affordable solutions.

So I got the Roli Seaboard Blocks.

Then at Superbooth 18 I was finally able to try a Continuum. I finally understood. As far as control goes, the Continuum is just light years ahead of the other controllers. This also makes it one of the most difficult to use. It is its own instrument.

This is its advantage but also its restraint. It excels at allowing you to breath real life into any sound.

For most people the Roli, Linnstrument, etc are more than enough. But if you really want your instrument to be an instrument in every sense of the word; If you want to be able to control it with as much of your input as possible, then the Continuum is the king.

It is a 5% advantage comparatively, but that 5% makes all the difference if you are at a point where you notice it.

There are other things to consider as well. The roli for example pairs wirelessly over bluetooth. This works with a BT USB adapter and the Roli FH-2 perfectly.

So to answer your question I use both. The Continuum is superior at being a controller. But if I had to live with only the Roli I would survive.
potatobrain
2disbetter wrote:
That is a complicated question. hihi

In the beginning I was very impressed and interested in MPE related controllers. I thought (and still think) that they were one of the best things that could happen for synths. Playing a synth with the same control over the sound as a guitar player, for example, is a really compelling idea.

I wanted a Linnstrument first, but because I only ever played power chords, and never really learned how to play a guitar was turned off by the layout.

I learned how to play the piano as a kid, and that is what I was familiar with.

I always liked the Haken, but it was just so expensive, and I didn't see the price justifying the advantages it offered over the more affordable solutions.

So I got the Roli Seaboard Blocks.

Then at Superbooth 18 I was finally able to try a Continuum. I finally understood. As far as control goes, the Continuum is just light years ahead of the other controllers. This also makes it one of the most difficult to use. It is its own instrument.

This is its advantage but also its restraint. It excels at allowing you to breath real life into any sound.

For most people the Roli, Linnstrument, etc are more than enough. But if you really want your instrument to be an instrument in every sense of the word; If you want to be able to control it with as much of your input as possible, then the Continuum is the king.

It is a 5% advantage comparatively, but that 5% makes all the difference if you are at a point where you notice it.

There are other things to consider as well. The roli for example pairs wirelessly over bluetooth. This works with a BT USB adapter and the Roli FH-2 perfectly.

So to answer your question I use both. The Continuum is superior at being a controller. But if I had to live with only the Roli I would survive.


Thanks a lot for your comprehensive answer dear sir. Were you able to translate all the MIDI messages Haken and Roli produce into the CV language? I may suppose it's not really enough just to translate them, but to also transform in to affordable ranges (polarizing, attenuating, etc.): looks like a lot of HP for this sort of utility modules.
2disbetter
potatobrain wrote:

Thanks a lot for your comprehensive answer dear sir. Were you able to translate all the MIDI messages Haken and Roli produce into the CV language? I may suppose it's not really enough just to translate them, but to also transform in to affordable ranges (polarizing, attenuating, etc.): looks like a lot of HP for this sort of utility modules.


The SSP works with any MIDI compliant USB controller and can also act as a MIDI to CV module should you wish. The Continuum comes with a Roland Midi DIN to MIDI USB dongle. The FH-2 can act as a host or a client for anything pushing MIDI through USB. It does this very well. The FH-2 alone is 8hp, and each expander (which add 8 additional outs) are only 4hp. 16hp will get you a VERY capable midi to cv setup.

Edit: Sorry, and yes the FH-2 and the SSP both understand the Roli and the Continuum. Both are just interpreting MIDI signals over USB. So any device that can do that works with both of them.

Using the SSP alone for this could free you up from needing a FH-2 or similar module, BUT then if you want to use the controller within your setup and not just in the SSP, you will end up using the outputs. So I find if I just want to control something in the SSP, that I plug into it, but I want to control more than just the SSP, I plug into the FH-2. Like this, for example, I can send gate and pitch cv to the SSP, but send y position data to the filter cutoff.

The FH-2 and expanders do take up a junk of space, BUT that space is worth it. It represents human control versus LFOs, Envelopes, and other modulation sources. Because of that, the FH-2 shouldn't be looked at, as just a midi to CV module, but more appropriately as a nearly infinite source of modulation, etc.

Current setup:
2disbetter
With the core element of synth refined, I now will use a pod 60 to hold various sound sources. All of which the SSP will sample. The SSP will then be the primary sound source, and everything else in the system will compliment or be directly responsible for refining the sound.
pekbro
Excellent work thumbs up
natureclubcassettes
the only thing i can think of whenever this thread pops up is that what you've named your "ultimate synth" is rather unfortunate, even if it is some sort of homage to the synth pop group, however dated.

maybe a non gendered name for something that you are using/plugging into all the time? sorry, this just speaks to the boys-club aspect of this forum. maybe it is different in germany.
2disbetter
How I name my instrument is something I reserve all the rights to, as I'm sure we all do. That it could be considered offensive or part of a boys club is disappointing, but also an aspect of the eye of the beholder. I certainly don't have those intentions, and I love the band.

I also find it disappointing that with the wall of text this thread represents, that is the one thing you latched on to.

Note: I'm not German, just living here. However, in German, every noun has a gender. It is part of the language itself. That however has no bearing here.
sutekina bipu-on
My "ultimate synth" that drove me to go Euro was deciding whether it was easier to replicate a Kawai K3 in euro, as opposed to hacking the K3's wavetable memory hihi
2disbetter
sutekina bipu-on wrote:
My "ultimate synth" that drove me to go Euro was deciding whether it was easier to replicate a Kawai K3 in euro, as opposed to hacking the K3's wavetable memory hihi


If this was your goal, my guess is you created a quite upgraded version of the K3 as an extra bonus. 80s DSP versus today is like night and day.

I like your thinking as well. I think of modular synthesis as really just custom synths, and it's awesome.
brandonlogic
Edit- disregard
2disbetter
brandonlogic wrote:
i cant look at this system, made up of the ssp, er301 and bitbox, distings, etc- without thinking the whole thing might as well be replaced with a laptop. is your reason for going modular purely for the UI instead of sound? Nothing wrong with that if so! just curious!


Check out the first post. It talks about all of that. In a nutshell, I think digital is the future, but analog is lush and in many cases more capable for less money.

This is a combination. The digital captures the analog, digital then plays everything, with analog and digital shaping and molding. It is a sponge that hopefully just keeps soaking up stuff. BTW, that's a toolbox, not a bitbox.

I have no doubts that in maybe as little as 5-10 years, digital will do everything, and only the hardcore collector will still swear by analog.

PS: I counted 8+ modules in your rack that rely exclusively on DSP. I suppose I could posit the same question to you. thumbs up
brandonlogic
2disbetter wrote:
brandonlogic wrote:
i cant look at this system, made up of the ssp, er301 and bitbox, distings, etc- without thinking the whole thing might as well be replaced with a laptop. is your reason for going modular purely for the UI instead of sound? Nothing wrong with that if so! just curious!


Check out the first post. It talks about all of that. In a nutshell, I think digital is the future, but analog is lush and in many cases more capable for less money.

This is a combination. The digital captures the analog, digital then plays everything, with analog and digital shaping and molding. It is a sponge that hopefully just keeps soaking up stuff. BTW, that's a toolbox, not a bitbox.

I have no doubts that in maybe as little as 5-10 years, digital will do everything, and only the hardcore collector will still swear by analog.

PS: I counted 8+ modules in your rack that rely exclusively on DSP. I suppose I could posit the same question to you. thumbs up


Makes sense, i removed my post before you responded because i didnt want to sound trollish haha. Yes have some in my system i don't have any problem with digital at all. It's the particular modules you choose and this configuration/setup that made me want to ask the question.
2disbetter
brandonlogic wrote:

Makes sense, i removed my post before you responded because i didnt want to sound trollish haha.


That's appreciated! But I honestly am good with all questions. It's the only way I'll ever have a viewpoint about it that isn't my own.

brandonlogic wrote:
Yes have some in my system i don't have any problem with digital at all. It's the particular modules you choose and this configuration/setup that made me want to ask the question.


Still, I think if you would have taken the time to read the first post, you would have found the answer already there.
D_Robot
natureclubcassettes wrote:
the only thing i can think of whenever this thread pops up is that what you've named your "ultimate synth" is rather unfortunate, even if it is some sort of homage to the synth pop group, however dated.

maybe a non gendered name for something that you are using/plugging into all the time? sorry, this just speaks to the boys-club aspect of this forum. maybe it is different in germany.


It's lucky I haven't created a thread about my synth "Well Hung Horse Boy" as natureclubcassettes would probably go into faux meltdown... hmmm.....



Only joking my synth is actually called "The Wee Beastie", named after a small highland animal I'd like to make sweet love to if I were able to catch one. However, as they're sequential hermaphrodites as long as I nailed them both sides of the fence, so to speak, that would, I assume, meet natureclubcassettes criteria so wouldn't cause outrage...
cg_funk
This synth looks ridiculously powerful! I think 'ultimate' is appropriate. I love all the interfaces you have right at hand.

I am perplexed that anyone would find the name "ultimate synth" offensive, or 'gendered'??? of all things? boy's club?? I don't think that was the intention of the name.... Maybe I'm missing something subtle here, but FYI the word ultimate just means 'the last, and greatest, in a series'.

nanners
2disbetter
So thanks to Rossum knocking a couple of new modules out of the park, and because I wasn't really liking the SSP out of the case per se, I'm growing this synth. This is of course all according to the plan in that this instrument should be a sponge to all the sounds it can 'absorb'. 12U is the hard limit that I've set for myself however.



Everything needed has been ordered. Just waiting on delivery. Some things like the Linnaeus are still not technically out.

Future plans include finding a software sequencer that I really like and that can interface with the FH-2. When that happens, I'll take the FH-2 number of outputs to 48 (from the current 32 I currently have). This will leave me with 18hp to fill eventually. This could be things that happen very very far down the road.

I'm still experimenting with writing an android sequencer app that actually works. Not sure it is possible just yet.
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> Eurorack Modules  
Page 1 of 2
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group