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
Why maths? Modular Synthesizers
Old 13th February 2019
  #31
It requires a list of modules to cover the functionally of Maths. That’s one of the main fantastic things about it. I guess if a system gets big enough, or focused on one thing that it does then getting rid of Maths makes sense but even then not really. I get that the interface can be a little much for some folks but it’s so natural to use after a couple tutorial vids that it makes me think people just think “that just looks too weird” and they don’t even try.
Is it a miracle that will change anyone’s life? No, but it’s certainly earned a place in the eurorack hall of fame in the “Most Useful” and “Best Module” categories. I personally use mine in every patch I make, and I make a lot of patches.
Old 13th February 2019
  #32
Gear Head
 
richardisabelle's Avatar
 

What I find funny, is even in VCV Rack, where hp per function is not an issue, Rampage is free, Slew Generator is free, and there are plenty of mixers/attenuators/attenuverters, people still pony up $35 for a Maths clone. I mentioned in a VCV Rack group that Maths functions could easily be patched up with free modules...it was not met well.
Old 13th February 2019
  #33
Quote:
Originally Posted by richardisabelle View Post
What I find funny, is even in VCV Rack, where hp per function is not an issue, Rampage is free, Slew Generator is free, and there are plenty of mixers/attenuators/attenuverters, people still pony up $35 for a Maths clone. I mentioned in a VCV Rack group that Maths functions could easily be patched up with free modules...it was not met well.
I can tell you that if I were to take up VCV as a serious tool/instrument (my comps lack the power) that I would instantly buy the Maths for it. Familiarity is meaningful so having an interface that I can relate to is important. I’ve dreamed of a rig with multiple Maths just because of the familiarity of the interface. In VCV it would actually be possible. Hmm...
Old 13th February 2019
  #34
Gear Head
 
richardisabelle's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by slaughtrhaus View Post
I can tell you that if I were to take up VCV as a serious tool/instrument (my comps lack the power) that I would instantly buy the Maths for it. Familiarity is meaningful so having an interface that I can relate to is important. I’ve dreamed of a rig with multiple Maths just because of the familiarity of the interface. In VCV it would actually be possible. Hmm...
I get that. I had Maths in my euro setup, and used it in every patch, but guess I've always been curious about Rampage, etc. Well anyway, you do you!
Old 4 weeks ago
  #35
Lives for gear
 
ngarjuna's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ossicle View Post
How snappy can you make the Maths as envelope? I don't mean kick drum punchy but string pluck-physical-acoustic type snappy?

I've read that it can get snappy in that way, but can't seem to find demos.

The reason I'm asking is I need a 'heart' module for my first eurorack and the Maths is seems like a safe and versatile go-to choice. But for me it's important that it can be used for envelopes for acoustic type plucks and bongos. Although I usually dislike hopping on bandwagons in this case it could be worth it.

Then again, if I knew better I might be able to combine two modules for the price of Maths for something more interesting... hmmm, Derp mentioned Tides...

I already have the Manhattan DTM mixer and an Envelator arriving soon + some oscs and filters.
The AD is, to my ears, much snappier than the AR envelope. But due to the variable curve setting it is about the snappiest envelope I’ve used in modular (I haven’t owned many dozens of EGs but I do have a Minimod and Intellijel with which to compare).

The AD + Strike on the Optomix is too snappy if anything (I often end up trimming the strike for a less plucky sound). For that whole chestnut (west coast bongos and plucks) VCO(s) + Optomix + Maths is straight fabulous, flexible and gives a lot of possibilities.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #36
Gear Maniac
 
Summer Of Nebula's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by slaughtrhaus View Post
[...] I’ve dreamed of a rig with multiple Maths just because of the familiarity of the interface. In VCV it would actually be possible. Hmm...
I've been in the Rampage camp, but sold it because I can use multiple Rampage's in VCV which I can route into my modular via Expert Sleepers easiliy. And it does exactly the same. Nothing more and nothing less, just the same.

I often map Midi CCs in VCV which give me the tactile feel too.

Never used Maths though, but it's not that different from Rampage as far as I can tell.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #37
Lives for gear
 
mekanik's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ossicle View Post
How snappy can you make the Maths as envelope? I don't mean kick drum punchy but string pluck-physical-acoustic type snappy?

I've read that it can get snappy in that way, but can't seem to find demos.

The reason I'm asking is I need a 'heart' module for my first eurorack and the Maths is seems like a safe and versatile go-to choice. But for me it's important that it can be used for envelopes for acoustic type plucks and bongos. Although I usually dislike hopping on bandwagons in this case it could be worth it.

Then again, if I knew better I might be able to combine two modules for the price of Maths for something more interesting... hmmm, Derp mentioned Tides...

I already have the Manhattan DTM mixer and an Envelator arriving soon + some oscs and filters.
I would also look into a regular adsr. The best one i have thats dual, is the studio electrinics shapers. its much much better than intellijels sh1t. by very far.

2 chans of envelopes done good.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #38
Lives for gear
 
mekanik's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ossicle View Post
Indeed. But to my understanding a good EG can add to that. I wish could found some find demos where the Maths was used like that.

I currently have the Doepfer A-101-2 LPG for testing and use the Beh Neutron envelopes, and the results are mostly hard and clicky which I think is mostly due to the Neutron's poor envelopes, and maybe also my the Doepfer and my lack of skill.
you probably need to just know how to adjust them better (i'm not saying this to call out as an amateur) I just know that with hardware envelopes you need to work with them quite a lot before you can work with them seemlessly/make them do what you really want. for example be snappy but without having a click.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #39
Lives for gear
 
mekanik's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by InterPhase View Post

Maths is on probation period in my rack at the moment Just as some others have mentioned in the thread I have most of the functions I would actually use covered elsewhere, often with modules that is much easier to dial in than Maths.
maybe we should have a make noise module get rid of sh1t pool in here.

Where we can all put in MN modules in the pool, that we dont want no more. Put up for trade or sale. To friendly fellow GSers. yeah its an idea.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #40
Lives for gear
 
mekanik's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by richardisabelle View Post
What I find funny, is even in VCV Rack, where hp per function is not an issue, Rampage is free, Slew Generator is free, and there are plenty of mixers/attenuators/attenuverters, people still pony up $35 for a Maths clone. I mentioned in a VCV Rack group that Maths functions could easily be patched up with free modules...it was not met well.

95% of people are idiots. what did you expect?
Old 4 weeks ago
  #41
Lives for gear
 
mekanik's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ngarjuna View Post
The AD is, to my ears, much snappier than the AR envelope. But due to the variable curve setting it is about the snappiest envelope I’ve used in modular (I haven’t owned many dozens of EGs but I do have a Minimod and Intellijel with which to compare).

The AD + Strike on the Optomix is too snappy if anything (I often end up trimming the strike for a less plucky sound). For that whole chestnut (west coast bongos and plucks) VCO(s) + Optomix + Maths is straight fabulous, flexible and gives a lot of possibilities.
I think the most "snappy" env is the doepfer ones they are in the microseconds iirc.

the thing with envs is that that it should be just fast enough, then have adjustable shape, (most vcas have adjustable shape though). if they are too fast its just a click. If the rise/fall of the envelope is faster than the actual waveform rise/fall that its adjusting up or down then it will result in a click. its the exact same phenomenon when planes break the sound barrier

except the wmd digital vca/env that had a zero crossing detector before it fires. I dont know if its the env or vca that does this. probably the vca.

this is not a hardware problem its a user knowledge problem.

i have several good envs here. qu-bit contour, doepfer a140, se shapers, wmd multimode (you cannot get more adjustability than this one ever).
Old 4 weeks ago
  #42
Lives for gear
 
mekanik's Avatar
 

i was working as waitress in a cocktail bar..,.

Old 4 weeks ago
  #43
Lives for gear
 
ngarjuna's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by mekanik View Post
I think the most "snappy" env is the doepfer ones they are in the microseconds iirc.

the thing with envs is that that it should be just fast enough, then have adjustable shape, (most vcas have adjustable shape though). if they are too fast its just a click. If the rise/fall of the envelope is faster than the actual waveform rise/fall that its adjusting up or down then it will result in a click. its the exact same phenomenon when planes break the sound barrier

except the wmd digital vca/env that had a zero crossing detector before it fires. I dont know if its the env or vca that does this. probably the vca.

this is not a hardware problem its a user knowledge problem.

i have several good envs here. qu-bit contour, doepfer a140, se shapers, wmd multimode (you cannot get more adjustability than this one ever).
Not sure what you’re on about, I was answering Ossicle’s specific question about whether Maths was snappy (it is) and suitable for plucky bongo sounds (it is very).
Old 4 weeks ago
  #44
Lives for gear
 
Ossicle's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by ngarjuna View Post
The AD is, to my ears, much snappier than the AR envelope. But due to the variable curve setting it is about the snappiest envelope I’ve used in modular (I haven’t owned many dozens of EGs but I do have a Minimod and Intellijel with which to compare).

The AD + Strike on the Optomix is too snappy if anything (I often end up trimming the strike for a less plucky sound). For that whole chestnut (west coast bongos and plucks) VCO(s) + Optomix + Maths is straight fabulous, flexible and gives a lot of possibilities.
That's very good to know.


Quote:
Originally Posted by mekanik View Post
I think the most "snappy" env is the doepfer ones they are in the microseconds iirc.

the thing with envs is that that it should be just fast enough, then have adjustable shape, (most vcas have adjustable shape though). if they are too fast its just a click. If the rise/fall of the envelope is faster than the actual waveform rise/fall that its adjusting up or down then it will result in a click. its the exact same phenomenon when planes break the sound barrier

except the wmd digital vca/env that had a zero crossing detector before it fires. I dont know if its the env or vca that does this. probably the vca.

this is not a hardware problem its a user knowledge problem.

i have several good envs here. qu-bit contour, doepfer a140, se shapers, wmd multimode (you cannot get more adjustability than this one ever).
This is very useful to know, but here my interest is mainly the Maths as envs. I would get it because it does tons of other useful stuff, but if the envs are not snappy it's not worth it for me, and I would look for other options.

My reference for snappy envs are Jupiter 8 and SH-101. The Neutron is like you describe, not snappy just clicky. I had Dark Energy mk 1 about ten years ago and that too was really fast but very unmusical, hard and clicky. The main reason i sold it. So I try to avoid such envs.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #45
It always cracks me up that a go-to modular sound reference of excellence is the Buchla bongo sound. If ever a sound was over rated and at the same time under utilized in relation to the amount it's talked about it's that one.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #46
Lives for gear
 
subdo's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by bkbirge View Post
It always cracks me up that a go-to modular sound reference of excellence is the Buchla bongo sound. If ever a sound was over rated and at the same time under utilized in relation to the amount it's talked about it's that one.
Yeah it's def become a cliche at this point but I think one of the reasons people talk about it is that it's kind of a simple geteway drug patch that leads to exploring voices that aren't subtractive in nature. One you start throwing FM/AM in there along with wave shapers and folders you can pull all kinds of metallic gongs, cymbals, and of course a million flavors of bleep bloop.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #47
Gear Addict
 

Alot of people say maths is useful for a small system.

I have a small system and find other modules (o_C, pnw) more useful, that cover more ground and offer attenuation of their functions. Maths is v. large.

I do have a mn function to cover some spaces but don't feel maths offers the return on hp I want. The function may be getting the chop as I don't use it that often.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #48
Lives for gear
 
gruvsyco's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by lost_the_peace View Post
Alot of people say maths is useful for a small system.

I have a small system and find other modules (o_C, pnw) more useful, that cover more ground and offer attenuation of their functions. Maths is v. large.

I do have a mn function to cover some spaces but don't feel maths offers the return on hp I want. The function may be getting the chop as I don't use it that often.
Your point is valid but where Maths strength lies is in a lack of menu diving. The biggest challenge with the module is remembering all the ways of doing all the things but, there’s no multifunction buttons or knobs. I’ve been slowly adding more modules with more functions per knob and button and I can honestly say, tweaking is getting a little less instant feeling.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #49
Gear Maniac
 
Summer Of Nebula's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by lost_the_peace View Post
Alot of people say maths is useful for a small system.

I have a small system and find other modules (o_C, pnw) more useful, that cover more ground and offer attenuation of their functions. Maths is v. large.

I do have a mn function to cover some spaces but don't feel maths offers the return on hp I want. The function may be getting the chop as I don't use it that often.
That's what I think too.

I don't mind a little bit of menu diving and my next purchase will be a second o_c with Hemisphere installed or a Pamela's New Workout which together offer much more to a small system than just one Maths.

Actually o_c feels more straight forward to me than Maths or Rampage.

Instant tweakability of course is better on Maths/Rampage.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #50
Quote:
Originally Posted by lost_the_peace View Post
Alot of people say maths is useful for a small system.

I have a small system and find other modules (o_C, pnw) more useful, that cover more ground and offer attenuation of their functions. Maths is v. large.

I do have a mn function to cover some spaces but don't feel maths offers the return on hp I want. The function may be getting the chop as I don't use it that often.
Those modules are menu-Divers that don’t offer much at all in the way of CV control. To each his own I guess but I’ll take Maths,although this is seriously apples to kiwis here.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #51
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by slaughtrhaus View Post
Those modules are menu-Divers that don’t offer much at all in the way of CV control. To each his own I guess but I’ll take Maths,although this is seriously apples to kiwis here.
I think most maths use cases are achieveable with o_c, you may need vcas if your other downstream modules don't offer that (all mine do so its superfluous). Some exceptions that I'm not interested in are there (pseudo lpf, analog ramp generator)

The menu diving is overstated. Especially Pam's which really isn't difficult or lacking immediacy imo. The screen on o_c in some cases makes it much friendlier than something without one, it's utility is staring you in the face rather than being buried behind cables.

Plus take into account the context of a small system. I'd rather not have the limits of maths over o_c or pnw.

It's more like granny smith vs golden delicious, imo. Functionally loads of overlap.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #52
Lives for gear
 
subdo's Avatar
I'm not sure if my 9U counts as a small system but I just don't think the o_c is for me. I followed it's development in the epic thread on muffs and I think it is a shining example of open source hardware done right. But at the end of the day two encoders is not the kind of interface I enjoy working with in modular. I could see using it for something set and forget like quantizing but even there I like the playability of the arpitect and if I was going to buy another quantizer it would be something like the Intellijel one with the little keyboard where you have immediate access to the note mask. I'm not going to say I'll never get an o_c. I do see the 8hp one show up on reverb for really cheap sometimes and I eventually gave in and got a Disting which has been quite useful for such a little thing. But the importance of the tactile interface is really important to some and maybe less to others. It really comes down to how you use your system.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #53
Quote:
Originally Posted by lost_the_peace View Post

It's more like granny smith vs golden delicious, imo. Functionally loads of overlap.
I understand, you really like your modules and you believe in them. You spent lots of money and they do what they are supposed to. That is all well and good, they are very respectable modules from great companies. I am not trying to take anything away from that. I would definitely own Pam's , O_c isn't my style. I am a little biased against screens and menus (not 100%) compared to hands-on control, but I am not a hater. I have ES FH2 and General CV which are 2 of the divey-est modules in existence.

I'm not trying to disrespect you or call you stupid either but you are kinda ignoring the main difference between these modules, cv control over parameters. No matter how you try and paint it, they aren't that close in functionality or most especially overlap because there's barely any cv control over parameters on your choices. You're definitely entitled to your opinion about what you like better but there is no comparison in this regard. One is analog with wysiwyg interface and cv control over nearly every single parameter, and the others are digital with screens and menus and not even close to the amount of functionality or cv control. They honestly couldn't be more different.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #54
Lives for gear
 
void23's Avatar
I have all three modules mentioned. They all have their place in a nice system and I see very little overlap between them. PNW is my clock, o_C is my quantizer, Maths is my CV processor.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #55
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by slaughtrhaus View Post
. They honestly couldn't be more different.
Fair cop, see your point! I was being a bit of an internet forum evangelist.

I see what you and others are saying about CV control, and perhaps this is where I'm missing something? o_c has 4x CV, 4x gate.

I appreciate they don't do the same thing but I guess we're talking semantics saying they are a world apart, or they are types of apples. I envisage in a small system you'd often use a 20hp maths module for bread and butter functions as you would others?

I'll revisit maths I'll admit it covers alot of ground. But. It's. Huge! (I have a doepfer a138m in 2x84hp btw so admit I'm a hypocrite :D)
Old 3 weeks ago
  #56
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by slaughtrhaus View Post
Those modules are menu-Divers that don’t offer much at all in the way of CV control. To each his own I guess but I’ll take Maths,although this is seriously apples to kiwis here.
I mostly agree. Never used Pam’s, but I do own Maths and O_C. Theres some overlap, but if nothing else using O_C for the stuff I could do with Maths just feels wasteful given the other things O_C can do. And while I don’t have quite the aversion to screens or menus that you do, I’m way more likely to patch Maths just because of the WYSIWYG aspect of it. Since I do have other modules that overlap with Maths, it may not be my first choice in a patch, but a point almost inevitably comes where I think “I want to do this” and Maths is there to do it, and I can patch it without a second thought. O_C tends to be something I’d patch earlier and use to drive a patch, and from what I’ve seen of Pam’s I’d probably approach it similarly...and like O_C probably be more inclined to use it earlier in my patching than as something that would slide in well later in the patch.

I don’t think the number of patch points on O_C are a big deal compared to Maths tho, because of the control given inside the module. But that is also highly dependent on how you program it on the screen, so it’s still less immediate.

The only answer is to buy all three, I think.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #57
Lives for gear
 
ngarjuna's Avatar
For me it’s not that screens or menus are inherently bad (I own and use and love my o_c) but they are mostly suitable for set-it-and-forget-it tasks. Using those encoders to make evolving changes or wiggle would be maddening or worse. Even just altering the quantizer is too clunky to “play” live the way I do with Rene, too many turn-click-turn-clicks and the precision on the encoders is not what I would call performance friendly.

So if I want functions that don’t need much manual input or to respond to CV then o_c can do that. But for any CV parameter that is going to get tweaked or played I’m going to find another module. That’s why, for me, definitely apples and oranges even in the functions they both provide.

Also it’s worth noting: at least some of what makes Maths so special lies in the logic bus. So while Function is cool for some of those Maths-y tasks it’s not really a great replica for much of the Maths experience. Two Function modules do not have the functionality of one Maths.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #58
Quote:
Originally Posted by ngarjuna View Post
For me it’s not that screens or menus are inherently bad (I own and use and love my o_c) but they are mostly suitable for set-it-and-forget-it tasks. Using those encoders to make evolving changes or wiggle would be maddening or worse. Even just altering the quantizer is too clunky to “play” live the way I do with Rene, too many turn-click-turn-clicks and the precision on the encoders is not what I would call performance friendly.

So if I want functions that don’t need much manual input or to respond to CV then o_c can do that. But for any CV parameter that is going to get tweaked or played I’m going to find another module. That’s why, for me, definitely apples and oranges even in the functions they both provide.

Also it’s worth noting: at least some of what makes Maths so special lies in the logic bus. So while Function is cool for some of those Maths-y tasks it’s not really a great replica for much of the Maths experience. Two Function modules do not have the functionality of one Maths.
Yup the logic bus gets ignored when people bring up Function, as do the attenuverters. Maths has a lot going on but it was tremendously well thought out in physical and electronic design. It is elegant to use and easy to make insane things happen.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #59
Gear Addict
 

This might begin to get a little troll tastic from me, but with an o_c and matrix mixer one can achieve the same as the attenuverters plus logic bus, and then some, with room to spare for a raft of other functions say using hemispheres. This costs 28hp mind.

Ofc there are differences with encoders and cv control which do make a difference and not everyone will dig., but I'm just outlining maths isn't exceptional in that you can achieve similiar elsewhere. Maths does offer an elegant and useable one stop shop.

This approach offers broader (but not always as good) functionality and a different pattern of using macro, menu driven features vs patching.. choose your poison. I hate it when I can't figure out how my own patch works the next day!

Personally I made a mistake thinking of a function as half a maths, and it's far from it! There is something greater than the sum of parts with maths, the attenuverters, logic bus and function generators. Function doesn't scratch the same itch

Just trying to debate and highlight alternatives. There's a lot of confirmation bias in music gear and genuinely I think there are credible, useable alternatives to maths especially when hp constrained or when managing a few voices.

E.g. how many people own a matrix mixer vs maths? Their utility is insane if you like the maths attenuverters and logic bus. The doepfer can be had at a snip and offers loads of hands on control.

To me falistri looks v. interesting since it can potentially be used for oscillators that track as well as alot of maths use cases.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #60
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mekanik View Post
I think the most "snappy" env is the doepfer ones they are in the microseconds iirc.
In my role as ladik pimp this goes for a song and offers microseconds envelopes!

C-041 Dual AD/AR envelope generator (4HP) – ladik.eu

Ofc not voltage controllable but a veritable bargain
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
Stevism / Modular Mania - all things Eurorack and modular synths/effects
11
gruvsyco / Modular Mania - all things Eurorack and modular synths/effects
16
acidhitz / Newbie audio engineering + production question zone
44
Mistur / Post your electronic music here
0
Deleted User / Electronic Music Instruments and Electronic Music Production
7

Forum Jump
Forum Jump