The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
The Modular Thread 2017 Modular Synthesizers
Old 8th January 2017
  #271
Lives for gear
 
ImNotDedyet's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by e3p0 View Post
I am quickly realizing that 84hp HEK is gonna fill up FAST.

I am likely going to DIY up a case. Thinking Moogish wood cheeks, Tiptop rails (possibly not as sliding nuts seem to omit gaps better). Maybe incorporate some folding type of setup for portability or to simply put it away sometimes. Would be nice to fold up patched too.

Any viable power options that are good/ great that won't break the bank? Interested in ones that have +- 12 and 5v.

May also incorporate some 1u for tiles/ diy mults...
There's a thread on muffs about a guy that build a unit in some plastic-like, folding tool box or something. Looked kinda cool.

Quote:
Originally Posted by justjools View Post
The reason I asked this is because I'm trying to figure out how modular can fit with more traditional composition. Not just from my perspective but the whole canon of musical history. I learn so much much from classical composition but also modern composition - my main instrument is guitar but I have also taken up piano over the last couple of years. And I'm wondering how modular can fit into this? I'd say I'm more East Coast than West Coast in the sense of having a synthesizer I can easily manipulate to create the kind of bass or lead sounds I would like.

I sat down today and sculpted a bass sound I liked with the Omikron module then played around with Maths and some LFO and I just came back to the raw dual voice and this was all I needed. Then I added some piano and violin from Kontakt libraries and suddenly it took a different direction and became a more orchestral piece and the analogue bass didn't fit.

It doesn't always turn out like this obviously; sometimes it might be a more electronic composition or even guitar. I like to keep things open and get insight and naturally follow where the idea might go.

So I would to ask how modular fits creatively into your studio? Are you more West Coast experimental or East Coast and traditional in your composition? I am still trying to work this out. I think there is a lot value in experimenting and I'm enjoying learning about synthesis, how it works and creating my own patches. But just going back to compose with Kontakt libraries today was a breathe of fresh air being able to think about composition and not purely sound design, and spending hours just playing around with patches. I hope there will be some point where I can quickly know what I want from modular and patch something that will be useful in a composition.

Beautiful soundtrack from The Painted Veil I watched recently including the great Erik Satie. The composer Alexandre Desplat is really great also and particularly like 08:53 - 04 River Waltz. The correlation between classical (modernist and traditional) and electronica is interlinked and complementary.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEpeZzl6Dh0

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexandre_Desplat
This question gets bantered about often here on Gearslutz and particularly in the Electronic Music portion of gearslutz. It seems to me there are a few differing camps people are in that answer this question: 1) the people who have no theory knowledge looking for confirmation that they can make electronic music without dedicating the time and effort to learning theory 2) the people who know enough theory to know key signatures, scales, etc - oftentimes people with minimal theory knowledge who don't want to go further in their theory education and make claims that knowing the rules hampers their creativity 3) the people that know theory well and know that breaking theoretical rules is oftentimes done to great effect in order to enhance the mood changes of the music. But in all cases, opinions, etc. it never takes into account what type of music the person responding makes and how it may differ from the OP.

So, as I alluded to in a previous post, you don't necessarily need to know music theory to make electronic music - even if you wanted melodic, following the key signature of the song tunes. There are many tools out there to help even the person with no knowledge to do so. This is also the case in the modular world. Use quantizers to keep everything in the same signature - some even allowing you to create your scales. Use your DAW and the many tools in it along with a MIDI to CV converter module. Use a sequencer with a keyboard and perhaps even scales such as the Beatstep Pro. This will help to keep melodic elements in the same musical scale.

Now, I said previously that it's not as necessary in the modular world, and that was for two reasons. Some - the more West Coast style tend to do more atonal music or randomized melodic sequences. Secondly, there is very little polyphony in modular, so you're essentially playing multiple lines of a monophonic voice in conjunction with another monophonic voice. This can be easily done using some logic and even tuning voices to thirds, fifths, sevenths apart, etc.

However, having said the above, having some musical theory knowledge would definitely help - even in the modular world. Just looking at my Doepfer quantizer, I have options of All/Major/Minor for the scale, Quint/Chord/Scale and then +7 and +6. The QBit Chord, while nice in functionality has a bunch of options such as diminished chords, minor, major, dominant, etc. While it's fun to play with these things to see how they sound, not knowing what the hell they do or sound like before hand leads to unexpected and oftentimes unhappy accidents when tweaking live. If I knew a reason for going from a major to a minor chord, or diminished chord beforehand, I could make my system do so to get the emotional response from the listener without tweaking and hopefully getting a "happy accident" as opposed to an "unhappy accident."

I've taken piano lessons on and off for my whole life, starting at about five or six. I taught for a year or two, and just recently started lessons again from a jazz-specific teacher. I've analyzed both classical and jazz compositions. I don't know theory inside-out, but I know it and know it fairly well. I approach modular as I do anything else. I find something that moves me, then build on top of that. It may be something I've created with MIDI in my DAW based on something I just dabbled on and spit out. It may be something I created on my BSP or Stepper Acid. It may even be something I created on the SQ-1, and I personally don't like sequencers that don't have keyboards on them. I like to know what notes I'm playing, not just tweaking a knob until it sounds ok or good. But I've also got enough experience to know that oftentimes stepping outside of the scale is a good thing, sometimes unexpected, sometimes adding tension to the music and so I never use the scale setting on something like my DAW MIDI editor or the BSP. Once I've got the notes down, I may do something to occasionally switch things up. I may record multiple tracks that sound good together in this fashion, or I may single track record everything. Maybe I'll just record a simple sequence, tweaking it for sampling later. Then forget the notes later on, but want to build something around it. Fine, just find notes that sound good together.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Derp View Post
THIS IS JUST MY OPINION!

I'm in the camp that learning theory at all ruins the brilliant naivete of one's music. Ultimately, self-taught musicians end up with their own sense of music theory, but when they don't know what rules they are and aren't breaking, it becomes more of an artform than an algebraic equation. (Not electronic I know, but Deftones are a great example of self-taught musicians that write great songs that accidentally know the rules. Deadmau5 apparently doesn't even know how to keyboard, but that's a loose definition of 'good' music there.)

I know for me personally, I liked the music I made before I learned theory. After learning theory, I found that my keyboard-oriented compositions became reallllly formulaic and annoying. I switched to doing most of my songwriting on guitar while consciously ignoring what notes I'm playing on the strings so that I'm playing more by feeling than by 'what note sounds best after this one?' to get around it. In fairness, I've read that when you first start studying theory your music becomes formulaic, but there's a point where your music branches out and becomes more adventurous again when you learn the more advanced concepts. I've never encountered that point myself, so I just don't recommend learning theory at all if you want to make music that you're happy with.
That's kind of a short-sighted opinion give you've admitted that you haven't taken the time to learn more advanced concepts. My guess is you know the scales for the given key signatures and ensure everything aligns to that scale. But look at some Ray Charles or Stevie Wonder, Jazz Fake Books or Classical Tunes from a harmonic perspective - just the chords go in and out of the scale of the key signature and often. Just knowing what notes are in a key signature does NOT mean every note in your composition must reside in that scale. But it will help you in composing and keeping things sounding relatively good. The key is experimenting and then knowing good places to break the rules.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Derp View Post
If you haven't messed with sliding nuts yet, try not to. Tiny gaps or not, TipTop's rails are sooooo much easier to install modules into and take them out of. You're likely to think "Oh, I'll never rearrange my modules, so leaving them in the same configuration and putting up with sliding nuts is fine!" but you're wrong. I have two racks with sliding nuts that I reserve for "this will never be rearranged" and they still get rearranged rather frequently.
This!

As one who has 4 rows of 84hp with sliding nuts and 1 row of 84hp with non-sliding, I'll take the non-sliding any day. And it's not just the thought of rearranging modules that makes it so. It sucks just getting a module in in the first place, lining up the nut on one side, getting the screw/bolt in, then lining up the other side, getting the screw in, but not so much that you still can't slide the module over enough to eliminate spaces. And don't forget that sometimes the nuts, at least on Doepfer's rails, can get "stuck" in the rail and require a bit of force to move them.

There is really only one advantage to the sliding nut system, and that's to account for odd hp modules. Outside of that, I highly recommend the non-sliding nuts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cane creek View Post
I built a 6U IKEA RAST a few years back, i choose the best quality parts and its lovely however for how much it cost me to build i could of bought a 9U Doepfer case.

So from that moment on i chose to buy may cases already built and concentrate my DIY on the modules themselves.

As for Power i only trust Doepfer simply because I've used Doepfer since day one and never had a single issue.
I have 1 Doepfer 12U Monster case, 1 Doepfer Monster base, 2 x 9U Doepfer cases and a Rast powered by Doepfer, i guess i like Doepfer cases
While I've still had mine for less than a year, Iv'e been more than happy with my two Doepfer A-100 DIY kits for power.

As for the Rast being expensive - it doesn't have to be. It's about $200 USD for a Doepfer A-100 DIY power kit. Throw in another $25 for a MN or MI +5v converter if you really need 5v. The Rasts themselves are $20. You can paint, or put eurothane on, or whatever with what you have on hand. So, for $220 - $250 or so, you can get 6U at 84hp or even go a bit bigger hp-wise if you customize the rails. I actually stacked two Rasts on top of each other to get 15U + some spots for passives. (I added an additional 3U in between the two) This all cost me about $500 USD, (3 Rasts - I screwed up the first one, 2 Doepfer A-100 power kits, a $25 5v module power converter from MN which uses up one of the inputs on the busboard and powers an entire busboard for 5v and an additional set of 84hp rails for the added 3u - I used scrap wood for the passives) which is about the cost of a Doepfer 6U case.
2
Share
Old 8th January 2017
  #272
Gear Guru
 
fiddlestickz's Avatar
screw the musical theory, I'll leave that for my 9 year old daughter to play around with, as long as I can tune things and know what sounds good I'll continue to just jerk around making nasty ass sounds that fit with beats or come up with something softer using strings and my fav few chords..
2
Share
Old 8th January 2017
  #273
Lives for gear
 
cane creek's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by smitty.west;12362390

Gary Burton, a well known and highly respected jazz musician, suggests that:

[I
musically untrained listeners who are unable to analyze a piece harmonically, contrapuntally, and otherwise in theoretical terms are unable to grasp fully the beauty of it and are therefore forever relegated to a vague, impressionistic experience of music. [/I]
I'm not musically trained and i bet i can analyse a piece of music better than Gary .

Gary probably comes from the same school as Brian May who's supposed to be respected too, Who on some of their Queen albums put "Synthesisers were not used on this album" as they were the dinosaurs who thought Synthesisers were not music.

Then years later turn up with this crock of $hit

Old 8th January 2017
  #274
Lives for gear
 
cane creek's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Derp View Post
THIS IS JUST MY OPINION!

I'm in the camp that learning theory at all ruins the brilliant naivete of one's music. Ultimately, self-taught musicians end up with their own sense of music theory, but when they don't know what rules they are and aren't breaking, it becomes more of an artform than an algebraic equation.
I like this.

Give me Boards of Canada over Mile Davis any day.
3
Share
Old 8th January 2017
  #275
Lives for gear
 
lineofcontrol's Avatar
 

I have no real concept of musical theory. But I know what I like and what sounds good.

Something I do a lot is when I hear other people's music I 'hear' what I would have done with it rather than the arrangement or sounds they used.

But I almost never ever hear in my own head the music that I am going to make, like many musicians do. I just play with sounds and sequences. But once I have a backbone I like, then I start to hear things that I want to do with it!

Yes I am crazy.
2
Share
Old 9th January 2017
  #276
Lives for gear
 
void23's Avatar
I pulled some stuff and racked the Omikron today. Wow, that thing is fat! Maybe even bigger than my Sub37. It just eats VCA / mixer input like crazy. Now I see why they say you can never have enough VCAs.
Old 9th January 2017
  #277
Lives for gear
 
Derp's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by ImNotDedyet View Post
That's kind of a short-sighted opinion give you've admitted that you haven't taken the time to learn more advanced concepts. My guess is you know the scales for the given key signatures and ensure everything aligns to that scale. But look at some Ray Charles or Stevie Wonder, Jazz Fake Books or Classical Tunes from a harmonic perspective - just the chords go in and out of the scale of the key signature and often. Just knowing what notes are in a key signature does NOT mean every note in your composition must reside in that scale. But it will help you in composing and keeping things sounding relatively good. The key is experimenting and then knowing good places to break the rules.
I've read and absorbed a couple books on theory from cover to cover. I still wouldn't recommend it.

I think the thing that's helped my songwriting the most is just learning proper mixing so that I'm keeping the final mix in mind from the moment I scratch out that first melody.

Cymbals go here.
Sprinkly synths go here.
Obnoxious vocals go here.
Synths that aren't so sprinkly go here.
This space reserved for thumpy thumps.
Leave the bass down here.

I make music like I make cakes. I like cakes.
Old 9th January 2017
  #278
Lives for gear
 
Derp's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by lineofcontrol View Post
I almost never ever hear in my own head the music that I am going to make, like many musicians do. I just play with sounds and sequences. But once I have a backbone I like, then I start to hear things that I want to do with it!
This. This is zen right here.
1
Share
Old 9th January 2017
  #279
Lives for gear
 
lineofcontrol's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Derp View Post
This. This is zen right here.
Haha. Don't know about Zen. Just how my brain seems to work.

Almost every single musician that I have interviewed for some publications I occasionally freelance for... All told me the same thing. They hear entire songs in their heads and just create them.

I never ever feel that. I am Salieri to Mozart!
2
Share
Old 9th January 2017
  #280
Quote:
Originally Posted by Derp View Post
I've read and absorbed a couple books on theory from cover to cover. I still wouldn't recommend it.

I think the thing that's helped my songwriting the most is just learning proper mixing so that I'm keeping the final mix in mind from the moment I scratch out that first melody.

Cymbals go here.
Sprinkly synths go here.
Obnoxious vocals go here.
Synths that aren't so sprinkly go here.
This space reserved for thumpy thumps.
Leave the bass down here.

I make music like I make cakes. I like cakes.
+1 on mixing. Just today I had to remind myself that as much as I may love certain patches or modular sounds I create, they may not coexist in a mix. I had around 10 sounds I had worked on with my synth, then quickly came to the realization that they didn't work with what I had going on with my Mother64 and Grendel (both of these are space hogs in a mix!). So then I started at the beginning of the preset bank and played tons of sounds listening for ones that fell into place, regardless of whether I liked them particularly. This is part of electronic music that no amount of theory will help... Although a quick understanding of some scales is helpful at times.
1
Share
Old 9th January 2017
  #281
Lives for gear
 
Derp's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thevegasnerve View Post
+1 on mixing. Just today I had to remind myself that as much as I may love certain patches or modular sounds I create, they may not coexist in a mix. I had around 10 sounds I had worked on with my synth, then quickly came to the realization that they didn't work with what I had going on with my Mother64 and Grendel (both of these are space hogs in a mix!). So then I started at the beginning of the preset bank and played tons of sounds listening for ones that fell into place, regardless of whether I liked them particularly. This is part of electronic music that no amount of theory will help... Although a quick understanding of some scales is helpful at times.
This was also a big part of what made me realize that in spite of having previously accumulated an analog synth-based studio and loving programming them, they don't work for the music I make. I like layers so in order to get something like a Vostok to fit in the mix, it has to be made anemic in order to fit. I didn't like having to gut my precious synth sounds and it felt like I wasn't being true to the synths sound. I learned to embrace the digital because skinny little digital sounds can be layered on thick. With the analog modules I do have, I also learned to just make skinniness part of their character.

It's funny though because in spite of consciously knowing this, I'll often sample-farm for my Fantom just sampling the hell out of my modular. Roughly 90% of the sounds I've made, I'll never be able to use in a mix.
Old 9th January 2017
  #282
Gear Maniac
 
LAVLAB's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Derp View Post
The guy I bought my Nebulae from (and subsequently will be returning it to on Monday) was saying that Nebulae modules in general are prone to loading issues and won't load your samples/instruments properly rather frequently. As a Nebulae owner, is this your experience as well, or do you think he was just trying to keep me from returning it? I'd love to have a fully-operational Nebulae eventually. The few times it worked, it sounded like a lot of fun before it would crash.
Hi. My Nebulae is pretty solid. I mean once in a blue moon it might hang at startup, but I just reboot and it is fine. This happens very infrequently. Might be something wrong with your unit.
1
Share
Old 9th January 2017
  #283
Quote:
Originally Posted by Derp View Post
This was also a big part of what made me realize that in spite of having previously accumulated an analog synth-based studio and loving programming them, they don't work for the music I make. I like layers so in order to get something like a Vostok to fit in the mix, it has to be made anemic in order to fit. I didn't like having to gut my precious synth sounds and it felt like I wasn't being true to the synths sound. I learned to embrace the digital because skinny little digital sounds can be layered on thick. With the analog modules I do have, I also learned to just make skinniness part of their character.

It's funny though because in spite of consciously knowing this, I'll often sample-farm for my Fantom just sampling the hell out of my modular. Roughly 90% of the sounds I've made, I'll never be able to use in a mix.
Yeah, i need more bleeps/blips/bloops in my music for texture. They should sit in mix just fine!
Old 9th January 2017
  #284
Lives for gear
 
ImNotDedyet's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Derp View Post
I've read and absorbed a couple books on theory from cover to cover. I still wouldn't recommend it.

I think the thing that's helped my songwriting the most is just learning proper mixing so that I'm keeping the final mix in mind from the moment I scratch out that first melody.

Cymbals go here.
Sprinkly synths go here.
Obnoxious vocals go here.
Synths that aren't so sprinkly go here.
This space reserved for thumpy thumps.
Leave the bass down here.

I make music like I make cakes. I like cakes.
I respect your opinion, but I disagree in your statement that knowledge of theory has caused you to not be as creative. I hear this argument frequently in these types of discussions, mostly from people that have just a handful of knowledge of theory.

The truth of the matter is that no amount of knowledge of music theory is going to make a person less creative. In fact, I'd argue that people that have limited or no theory knowledge spend time wandering aimlessly, trying to find something that sounds good. That's not creative - it's stumbling onto something. Then suddenly, once they have learned a few rules from theory all of their "creativity" is gone. This too, is false. The lack of the "creative" sound they once found is only because their head is telling them to only play by the few rules of theory they happen to know. When you understand that the rules of theory are merely guidelines and can be broken while still making interesting musical phrases, then you'll understand that theory can't as people state, "make them less creative." It's their head telling them they _have to_ follow those rules - that's making them less creative.

And finally, comparing someone who hasn't made an album in what, 40 years to someone who's had all the technological advances of the last twenty years at their fingertips is a bit silly. I wonder what Miles would have or could have done if he had a modular synth. He forced Herbie Hancock to play a Rhodes - an instrument Herbie considered to be a toy at the time until he really spent some time on it per Miles' order. So he was certainly open to and inviting of new sounds. I also once heard a story about Miles where they were rehearsing and piano player played the wrong chord. Miles heard the wrong chord and instead of playing the notes he was supposed to play, played different notes which tied that "wrong chord" into the other musical elements that were expecting the "right chord." Now put that kind of recognition and ability to respond musically in order to correct things or make things sound good together and put it on a modular synth that's playing a few different voices, one being a random. I'll bet he could have absolutely owned a modular.
6
Share
Old 9th January 2017
  #285
Gear Maniac
 
MuffWigglerShop's Avatar
 

PSA:

why is the modular thread turning into a discussion of music theory? this seems counter productive to all the things.

basic theory can solve some problems depending on what you want to do.

some people make sound collages and experimental music divorced from theory.

it's all good.. or can be.

maybe we should all just try to make whatever we think good music is.. regardless of actual notes or difficulty etc etc yada yada yada.

NAMM is coming. brace yourselves!
3
Share
Old 9th January 2017
  #286
Lives for gear
 
gruvsyco's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by e3p0 View Post
I am quickly realizing that 84hp HEK is gonna fill up FAST.

I am likely going to DIY up a case. Thinking Moogish wood cheeks, Tiptop rails (possibly not as sliding nuts seem to omit gaps better). Maybe incorporate some folding type of setup for portability or to simply put it away sometimes. Would be nice to fold up patched too.

Any viable power options that are good/ great that won't break the bank? Interested in ones that have +- 12 and 5v.

May also incorporate some 1u for tiles/ diy mults...
Here's something I did in Fusion 360 and had done by a local woodworker.
http://a360.co/1cPnfar

I also mocked up a 6U one:
http://a360.co/2hWP83z

You can download the files in various formats. The hole spacing is designed for TipTop rails. I had 2 sets made, one in purpleheart and the other in black walnut.
Attached Thumbnails
The Modular Thread 2017-20150729_041522637_ios.jpg   The Modular Thread 2017-20150729_024532518_ios.jpg  
6
Share
Old 9th January 2017
  #287
Lives for gear
 
Hokut's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by gruvsyco View Post
Here's something I did in Fusion 360 and had done by a local woodworker.
http://a360.co/1cPnfar

I also mocked up a 6U one:
http://a360.co/2hWP83z

You can download the files in various formats. The hole spacing is designed for TipTop rails. I had 2 sets made, one in purpleheart and the other in black walnut.
What did you do for power? Flying power buss?
Old 9th January 2017
  #288
Lives for gear
 
Hokut's Avatar
 

This is looking interesting for Sequencing, Sampling companion to modular unless one already has or wants to keep sequencing and sampling within the case

Akai MPC X
Akai Professional MPC X Standalone Sampler and Sequencer | Sweetwater

4 Midi Outs + 8 CV/Gate Outs
3
Share
Old 9th January 2017
  #289
Lives for gear
 
duvalle's Avatar
 

My setup 1 year ago:





My setup Today:






I started with 3hp and now have 9hp.
But i really try NOT to get more hp and keep it as is.
Way too easy to get lost in modular ...

I focus on stuff that is more fun to do in eurorack vs. DAW.
For now i try NOT get into the idea of making everything with a modular.

BTW - this guy is really awesome:
Old 9th January 2017
  #290
Lives for gear
 
e3p0's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by gruvsyco View Post
Here's something I did in Fusion 360 and had done by a local woodworker.
http://a360.co/1cPnfar

I also mocked up a 6U one:
http://a360.co/2hWP83z

You can download the files in various formats. The hole spacing is designed for TipTop rails. I had 2 sets made, one in purpleheart and the other in black walnut.
I very much like this. Can you demystify how I can download this in say a 2d full size vector type image. I am seriously liking this and might take the file to a fabricator and do an aluminum set and a wood set of the 6u (to start) and 9u (when I outgrow the 6u).

Some format that can be water jet cut or CNC would be AMAZING! I could also print out full-size and bandsaw the wood. I would buy you beer!

That is beautiful and I now have no desire to do a folding case.
Old 9th January 2017
  #291
Lives for gear
 
ngarjuna's Avatar
Introducing the modular to his new little brother...
4
Share
Old 9th January 2017
  #292
Lives for gear
 
Hokut's Avatar
 

For those who also think that using nylon washers underneath screws makes your Eurorack Modules sound better... this may be of interest.

The other day I got a bag of M2.5 screws with a bag of M2.5 nylon clear plastic washers. Wrong size because the Doepfer cases use M3 screws... so I ordered M3 screws with M3 nylon washers which arrived today!

Anyway, while waiting for the M3 stuff to arrive I tried using the M2.5 Washers with the M3 Screws I already had (screws that came with the modules). And they do offer a very nice snug fit on the M3 Screws

Today I received the M3s and even if I now have M3 washers I preferred to use M2.5 Washers with M3 Screws

Why I prefer M2.5 washers with M3 Screws.
1) You push the M2.5 washers to fit the M3 screws and thanks to the snug fit they do not even try to fall out! This means you don't need to worry about holding the washers when screwing in or screwing out. They stay in place and don't move!

2) They look better! They are there but you cannot see them and they are just as big as the head of the screw so they do offer full screw-head cushioning in a very discreet way


IMAGES - PROOF!
Compare [M3 Screws + M3 Washers (left)] against [M3 Screws + M2.5 Washers (Right)]



M3 Washers can look ugly and can be annoying when close to edge of rail space



M3 Screws with M2.5 Washers offer protection with discretion

Note: due to close up picture and lighting you can see the small washers clearly but at normal distance when using the modular you only see the screw-heads


Then the audio test
1 - I played the test track before installing washers....
2 - Then played the exact same track after installing the M2.5 washers to all the screws and completing fitting for all the screws (instead just 2 screws per module)

The difference in audio was amazing! It was like if I had just installed thousand of ££££ worth of acoustic treatment
With nylon washers installed...
- the high frequency felt much sweater and clearer at the same time
- the mids where more detailed helped by an improved rendition of stereo image
- the low felt more punchy and so much more detailed

All for a handful of £ spent on M3 screws fitted with M2.5 washers

7
Share
Old 9th January 2017
  #293
Lives for gear
 
subdo's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by justjools View Post
The reason I asked this is because I'm trying to figure out how modular can fit with more traditional composition. Not just from my perspective but the whole canon of musical history. I learn so much much from classical composition but also modern composition - my main instrument is guitar but I have also taken up piano over the last couple of years. And I'm wondering how modular can fit into this? I'd say I'm more East Coast than West Coast in the sense of having a synthesizer I can easily manipulate to create the kind of bass or lead sounds I would like.

I sat down today and sculpted a bass sound I liked with the Omikron module then played around with Maths and some LFO and I just came back to the raw dual voice and this was all I needed. Then I added some piano and violin from Kontakt libraries and suddenly it took a different direction and became a more orchestral piece and the analogue bass didn't fit.

It doesn't always turn out like this obviously; sometimes it might be a more electronic composition or even guitar. I like to keep things open and get insight and naturally follow where the idea might go.
Modular's roots lie pretty deeply in experimental music. Obviously there's nothing wrong with or stopping you from creating a basic subtractive voice. It's the most popular form of synthesis for a reason. But historically the format emerged from Musique concrète, Stockhausen, Radiophonic Workshop, Delia Derbyshire and the more experimental side of things. It wasn't until the late 60s, early 70s that the more melodic Belin school, Wendy Carlos, Moog sound really became popular and it was around that time that synths in general started transitioning to fixed architecture.

After that period, modular became more of a niche and it's users became the tourch barers of more experimental styles. This is probably why Bob Moog is a household name while Don Buchla and gang not so much. Fast forward to Deopfer and the birth of eurorack and you see that tradition being revived in an era when Minimoogs, 909s, etc. are starting to sound pretty common place and artists are wanting to again push the boundaries. And by boundaries I mean more than just the sonic pallate (although that is definitely part of it) but also composition techniques, basically exploiting random voltage, quantizers, s&h and other generative techniques to the point where you're not composing notes as much as creating networks of evolving voltage that is designed to be musical e.g. the ever popular Krell patch.

Only you can figure out how all that applies to your music but I think a deep dive into the history of modular and the pioneers of electronic music is very enlightening and inspiring. At least it was for me. I've found that working with modular is almost the polar opposite of working in a modern DAW. I can write music on the modular and I can write music in a DAW but I haven't had much success in doing both at the same time. That may be a personal block on my part. I know people who use modular only for sound design and do all their writing on a DAW using modular samples. There's also the ES stuff that lets you use a PC as a giant CV generator. At the end of the day it's just a tool that either works for you or doesn't. There's no shortage of people deciding after 100s of HP that modular isn't for them and selling the whole shebang.
Old 9th January 2017
  #294
Lives for gear
 
subdo's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hokut View Post
For those who also think that using nylon washers underneath screws makes your Eurorack Modules sound better... this may be of interest.
I've never heard this at all. What's the difference? I can understand washers for preventing rack rash and preserving resale value but sound better? really?
2
Share
Old 9th January 2017
  #295
Lives for gear
 
void23's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hokut View Post

The difference in audio was amazing! It was like if I had just installed thousand of ££££ worth of acoustic treatment
With nylon washers installed...
- the high frequency felt much sweater and clearer at the same time
- the mids where more detailed helped by an improved rendition of stereo image
- the low felt more punchy and so much more detailed

All for a handful of £ spent on M3 screws fitted with M2.5 washers

LOL!
2
Share
Old 9th January 2017
  #296
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hokut View Post
Then the audio test
1 - I played the test track before installing washers....
2 - Then played the exact same track after installing the M2.5 washers to all the screws and completing fitting for all the screws (instead just 2 screws per module)

The difference in audio was amazing! It was like if I had just installed thousand of ££££ worth of acoustic treatment
With nylon washers installed...
- the high frequency felt much sweater and clearer at the same time
- the mids where more detailed helped by an improved rendition of stereo image
- the low felt more punchy and so much more detailed

All for a handful of £ spent on M3 screws fitted with M2.5 washers

April isn't for a few months?

Obvious troll is obvious?

Well played, almost got me?
4
Share
Old 9th January 2017
  #297
Lives for gear
 
WozNYC's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by subdo View Post
I've never heard this at all. What's the difference? I can understand washers for preventing rack rash and preserving resale value but sound better? really?
He's joking.
1
Share
Old 9th January 2017
  #298
Lives for gear
 
subdo's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Wozniak View Post
He's joking.

Ok I'll see myself out
2
Share
Old 9th January 2017
  #299
Gear Maniac
 
Strawberry's Avatar
I knew it was BS, those are digital washers.....never gonna sound as good as analog!
4
Share
Old 9th January 2017
  #300
Gear Maniac
 
Strawberry's Avatar
I knew it was BS, those are clearly digital washers, never gonna sound as good as analog ones.
Topic:
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump