#10

Can’t say if could be a replacement, depends on the context. Obviously they definitely have overlapping capabilities. This is something I’m currently exploring–for the record, I’ve never been in love with Maths. As a patches control source, Maths is probably more readily tweakable, especially because of channels 1 and 4 controls. The lock/unlock feature of the 506 is key.

#11

Early adopter here. I may be a little biased because i’m a long time fan of ADDAC’s designs, but i must say they crafted a pretty insane module here.

@b_w said it : outstanding building quality, a lot of functionalities to be mastered in a small place. I agree the switches feel tiny at first, specially the one’s about the enveloppe’s range (the fastest are in the middle, slow on the right, mid on the left). That being said, the little pots for scaling and the leds help a lot : you can always figure where you are.

I haven’t dig that much in it. For now i’ve used it in percussive patches, where the random lengths, carefully wrapped around close values give a very natural and acoustic feel to a beat. With the lock function and the option to put the random out of the way (when MIN>MAX), i use it as four enveloppes packed with gates (EOR and EOF). I used also the slew to have two versions of the random CV spitted by the expansion (the gated one and a slewed one derived from the first).

All in all, the possibilities are huge.I’ve owned a Maths and the 506, clearly, is much less immediate at first, less “open” in a sense. But it’s a module that make you think about what you want, and approach a patch in a reflexive way i tend to appreciate.

Sure, not everybody’s cup of tea, but it’s a thing to be tried.

2 Likes
#12

Agree wholeheartedly. As an owner of one, I was wondering if you had this issue: My channel 1 lin/log pot is very tight. I’m hoping it will loosen up. Do you have any like that too?

#13

stochastic_redesign
stochastic_redesign.png1024×768 21.7 KB

I made a mockup of a redesigned Stochastic Function Generator, which would break the center portion of ADDAC’s design into individual modules, with anywhere from one to four expansions able to be chained to the main 506 controls. It would take up a few more HP if fully expanded, but I think it’d also be a hell of a lot more playable.

2 Likes
#14

No, in my case the pots show no problem.

The offsets are very sensitive, but it’s just the consequence of their function. When you offset an enveloppe, the result is immediate (for example, with a VCA a perc can turn drony etc.) and the tiny size doesn’t help that much!

Build quality wise, beside having a 709Mel with the Dry/Wet inverted (a common mistake in this batch i think), i haven’t had any problem with Addac…

1 Like
#15

Where did this come from?

#17

I made the mockup in Adobe Illustrator.

1 Like
#18

I think the ADDAC506 looks excellent. Currently waiting on mine to ship :slight_smile:

1 Like
#19

I received mine a few weeks back. I also own the “original” design made by the collaborator of ADDAC Systems, and I can say I absolutely love where they went with this design. The UI is a non-issue for me, but then again I never mind small modules that others do.

I’m also in love with the Min/Max concept that ADDAC have been using in their random modules. I like how you can define where you want your random changes to take place.

Currently trying to figure out a case build around the stohastic functions. This is like an extremely pimped Doepfer a-143-1/a-143-2.

3 Likes
#20

Originally, I was concerned with the UI, but after a few months i can say that the 506 is the heart (ok, maybe lungs?) of most of my patches. It has been long enough that it’s become second nature to operate.

And I formally amend my previous exchange with @bobbcorr. I sold the maths what seems like ages ago. Just the 506 now. Not looking back at all.

#21

Your amendment to our previous exchange is noted and appreciated. I refer the honorable person to the reply I gave some moments ago. Cough.

1 Like
#22

What are people thinking about the ADDAC506 at this point? I’m interested in getting one instead of Maths. To me it just seems like there’s more potential for interesting moments with the EOR EOF and Sum / Averages.

Anybody replace Maths with the 506 and have any regrets? I guess at this point i have a fair ammount of attenuators so i think it would make sense… On the fence - sell me either way?

1 Like
#23

i very nearly pulled the trigger on one but i can get a similar effect with an envelope, S&H and a slew. it’d save a bit of patching but i can’t justify that expense right now!

#24

I know Keith Fullerton Whitman loves his.

1 Like
#25

I like it well enough, and I’ve only just begun to employ it.

1 Like
#27

I’ve noticed this one of several posts that proposes replacing Maths with the 506 and as an owner of the 506 since pre-order (and an owner of Maths) that I can deliberately say, it is not. I don’t think it’s an apt replacement for quad envelopes either, as the 506 brings pretty unique functionality with its variable duration (and response curve via the expander).

If you are seeking a Maths replacement, I would highly recommend the Frap Tools Falistri. It features an equally confusing aesthetic (upon first glance, it’s actually quite intuitive, like Maths), and several options for polarization and attenuation.

The 506 does feature both AVG and SUM functions in the vein of the Maths mixer, but lacks the 2 channels of input attenuation and polarization that Maths offers. Falistri does offer a 4 quadrant multiplier which matches some of Maths mixer functionality (there is some convenient normalization occurring within Falistri as well, but I don’t want to make this Falistri focused).

If your primary use for Maths is envelopes, then the 506 can in fact replace it, and you’ll get twice as many envelopes. I feel that envelopes are only half the function of Maths and to achieve the attenuation and polarization functions with channels of the 506 using its slew functionality is possible, the density of the controls within the confines of locking and unlocking channels makes it fairly difficult.

Maths isn’t necessarily a functionally dense module in comparison to the 506, not by 2020 standards anyhow, but there’s a reason it’s the most popular eurorack module. A lot of that has to do with its UI. It’s spacious and fairly straightforward in use. 506 is straightforward, like most ADDAC designs, but it’s not particularly comfortable. I also have sausage fingers.

5 Likes
#28

Looking just at functionality, is the main difference just that it doesn’t have 2 dedicated attenuverter channels? While it might not be as clean as maths, is there anything you couldn’t achieve on the 506 if utilizing attenuverters in a separate module? Looks like 506 doesn’t have inverse output.

Also how do you personally use the 506 differently than you would use maths?

#29

I use the 506 for variable shape and duration envelopes, usually with more CV directed at fall time and using the main length toggle to define the individual envelopes approximate duration.

I tend to use the Maths envelopes for what I feel they excel at: snappy exponential attack/logarithmic decay envelopes.

The lack of inverse output on the 506 has never been an issue for me, nor would I imagine it be for most…and for dedicated signal mixing I prefer Blinds. The sum and average outputs of the 506 are rarely used for me, unless I just need a source to add some movement to waveshaping or PWM. The fact that each off the 506’s envelopes has dedicated offset and attenuation makes it functionally superior to most other EG’s in my rack.

I, perhaps as a creature of habit who needs to broaden his horizons, use the 506 as a source of semi-random modulation instead of feeding random CV into Maths rise and fall controls for envelope variation. Now Maths serves me LPG style functions while 506 is a mechanism for evolving soundscape.

4 Likes
#30

Nice, great breakdown.

Can the 2 middle EG’s of the 506 be used as Envelope Followers when audio is sent to the inputs? I really miss my ADDAC envelope follower and regret selling it. Haven’t been able to find an EF with as accurate of a response as the ADDAC401.

1 Like
#31

UGH why did I sell my Maths (well rent blah) :weary: Glad I still have a Function but Maths was the first Eurorack thing I ever had, and is the only module I can see my self re-purchasing at some point. It’s a bit cliche but yeah I loved it as a snappy envelope generator (serge patch programmers come at me!) Attenuverters were a nice bonus. Hahhh ADDAC506 looks lovely though too.

2 Likes