Eurorack: ask questions here


Shades does this, yes. with nothing patched to the input, each Shades output will deliver -5v to 5v if the switch is set to bipolar mode, though a wider range can be achieved with the jumpers in the back of the module.


yes, Triatt, Shades, the middle channels of Maths, etc., all work this way.



You know if Malekko 8nu8r does too? Didnt hear back from them


From their website listing

When no input is present, each half of the 8NU8R produces a steady DC voltage (offset) adjustable by the level control. DC offsets have many uses in a modular system.

Translation: yes. Since the module is only billed as an attenuator and not an “attenuverter,” I think it’s reasonable to expect that said DC offset will be unipolar, probably 0 to +5V.


Awesome thought that was the case but wanted to make sure, thanks for the replies!


I think Rosie is a great mixer. You’ve got two mono channels you can fade between and a mono/stereo input with independent level control. It works superbly in smaller systems. If you don’t want outboard gear like a mixer, it would be hard to go wrong with Rosie.


fair enough! I missed that patch in my mental overview


I suppose this may be the place to ask.

Is panning achieved purely through differences in the level of signal between the left and right? (Am I explaining myself ok?).

I am looking at Rebeltech’s mix01 which has independent left and right level controls for 4 mono inputs and mixes to a stereo output. In my mind it would help widen the stereo field. But I am wondering if that is the case at all :confused:


yes, panning is achieved this way. often panning knobs follow a particular curve that will try to hold some property of the signal constant, so having independent left and right controls will give you more control at the expense of losing the smooth feel of following that curve.

the other main technique of spatialization is differences in phase—small delays between right and left that mimic the way your ears pick up sound in space. (there are others, like clever production of effects, EQ, etc, but these seem more like post-production stuff aimed at headphones)


Cool, 20 characters of thanks.


Question: why are you interested in Sheep?

I only ask because: stock Tides firmware is superb, and it will fulfill some useful roles in your system. Notably: the Dreadbox has useful mix/mult/attenuation built in, that’s handy. But its LFO is quite straightforward: a single, unlocked multi-shape LFO. Which you can at least attenuate. But there’s nothing more sophisticated, and no envelopes of any kind (AD/AHR/ADSR/etc).

Tides is, depending on how you configure it, an LFO with lots of CV control; a clockable LFO, clockable at divisions as well as whole clock amounts; a clock source or clock divider; an AD or AHR envelope; and an interesting synth voice (no envelope, but oscillator/filter/VCA). I use mine a lot for bass sounds, but it’s also a great utility module at slower-than-audio rates - it may look large, but it has tons of CV control and a VCA and all its timed modes can be clocked.

Putting Sheep on it turns it into a wavetable oscillator, sure, but you lose a lot of its other aspects, and I think if you’re going for Rings and Morphagene as your ‘big ticket’ sound sources… Sheep makes less sense than something that could be an oscillator or all manner of other stuff, depending on how you wire it.

I’ll stop repping for Tides again now.


Has anyone used this Dave Smith module?

It seems as though there’s not a lot of information out there.

I found out about it in the context of replacing an Analogue Systems RS-120 Comb Filter.

Thanks for any thoughts.


My main thought was wavetable synth with a slow LFO cycling through the wavetable = good starting place for slowly-evolving drone, but obviously I’d give the normal firmware a try too! Your post has definitely sold the standard firmware to me a lot more.


Thanks, your suggestion about TQ instead of Veils has helped me rethink my skiff a bit more. Made a few changes and thought about dropping the Braids. What interested me about it were the alt firmwares and the pluck-ish sounds.

Does anyone know of other modules based on physical modelling besides Rings-Braids / Plonk?


Plaits has a couple of Rings modes + a lot others. It is literally the new Braids :slight_smile:


Plaits, Pluck, or you can look into Karplus-Strong synthesis using short delays, comb filters and the like. It’s a large part of what these digital modeling synths are based on.


Pluck is nice. I have one myself. I’m also waiting on my plaits preorder (2nd batch). You could also try elements. There is a micro version of it floating around somewhere if size is a concern.


I don’t find Plonk, Mysteron, Braids, Plaits or delay-based K-S, to be a good substitute for Rings – it’s not just Karplus-Strong, its a modal resonator with some other tricks up its sleeve including an audio input, making it great for sustained tones and feedback.

Plaits is an excellent companion to Rings though.

Although you could get an Organelle and run Rings on it (with or without Orac); Norns is likely to have a Rings port someday, and ER-301 might too.


Wait… What is this witchcraft you speak of!!! :open_mouth:


I’m just really interested in physical modelling, and I like Rings but don’t like that bright trademark MI sound that much (reason I dropped Braids after trying it). Idk, every time I hear Rings I know it’s that module…
Do you know alternatives to Rings? I guess there’s not any and that’s what makes it so loved. Just curious about other often overlooked alternatives if there’s any.

Thanks @steveoath, @Justmat for the Plaits suggestion but same as above, it sounds “too Mutable” (I like MI, just not my style after all). I’ve been looking into Karplus-Strong but I guess it’s more costly to come up with different modules for it as opposed to a single one.