hmmm. Crow, W/ and some VCAs? The Abstract Data triple discrete VCA in 4hp looks interesting, for instance.
The Addac 306 is 8hp—five channels of cv with individual bias, slope, and direction—which can be cross-faded. Brilliant little controller module, and would make an excellent complement to cold mac.
ALMs quad vca is 8hp
Given room, I think most systems can benefit from Triple Sloths. Very slow random is always nice. Since you have a lot of MN attenuation is taken care of at many destinations.
Unless you’re good with the Optomix as a mixer (and yeah, I know Cold Mac and 3 Sisters or Quadratt or Maths can do some mixing too), some more dedicated mixing could be useful depending on your workflow…
If I have a hole that I have “no use” for, I tend to stick a Disting or two in there. Sometimes you may need a VCA or another effect/utility.
If I use it for only one thing. I then go search for a module doing that thing.
A bit late, but… I put a Disting and a 2hp Tune and Filt (replaced with the MMF now). They would fit and compliment your Shared Sustem nicely.
do output modules guarantee a max output of LINE level? (and expect line level inputs)
or are they ‘just’ attenuators, so knob goes from zero to modular level?
Ive been looking at both befaco and erica synths, and neither actually say this is what they do, and don’t seem to detail the maximum output level on their specs…
(they do detail the output spec on the headphone, just not the main outs)
Every output module I’ve seen brings thing down to something like line level; the point is that it’s not just an attenuator, but something you can run into PA/laptop/amp.
Hi guys, i LOVE my Three sisters, its a great filter with tons of different uses and a very enjoyable performance tool in my tracks BUT after see (and hear) what can make the new module of Make Noise (and the plus of stereo out) im very confused: i want it in my 84 hp 6u rack, but i dont know if to keep both filters in my rack, or sell Three sisters and buy a Qpas, or keep Three sisters, ignore Qpas and go for a different module to fill my rack (like a Chronoblob 2).Looking for wise words of happy owners of Three sisters who tried Qpas in NAMM. Thanks (and love) in advance.
Did you already imagine some patching between these two beasts ?
Why not taking the Qpas and decide after ?
Its a (empty) pocket problem. ill have to wait a few months to fill it (with $$$) before buy it.
Funny, I had similar thoughts. I’m looking to add a second sisters to my rack, and I’ve been sure it’s the right thing to do, but QPAS left me wondering. I think I’d miss the formant mode on sisters though - that just fits with my sound design. Easy to get drawn in by the Make Noise demos as they always do such a great job with them.
Whenever I sit down and patch something these three concepts are the heart of what makes me happy.
Two different filter topologies with [insert number here] different use cases. Both are—I suppose the term is—multi-peak, but QPAS’ Radiate /= Three Sisters’ Span, and QPAS’ pre-filter core VCA contributes greatly to its sound from what I’ve seen. (I can’t recommend Tony’s Perfect Circuit audio presentation enough in this respect. Radiate is still a bit mysterious to me, but it’s definitely not Span.)
All my patches are stereo and I use Three Sisters to animate bandpass filtering of voices that end up being panned later in the signal chain. In this respect Three Sisters is a wonderful addition to a stereo setup.
But… what makes QPAS different to me is “stereo in, stereo out.” This is oddly the module that sold me on the Morphagene as a sample/loop mangler. I think QPAS will be very glorious on source material like samples that are already stereo, whereas Three Sisters might be more appropriate for animating your three VCO synth patch.
All good insights to consider when comparing the two; however I would say that VCA pre filter is a technique utilized to great effect within the Mannequin-verse (i.e. Mangrove’s Air, Just Friends Plume /Just Type Synthesis). Three Sisters has a good amount of range on the quality knob to acheive prolonged resonance in a similar fashion.
Can anyone share some tips on using percision adders to combine seqeuncers?
I’m experimenting to create variations, and I’m finding it hard to dynamically find offsets that don’t produce wildly sour notes with the original sequence. I’ve tried a few variations with quantizers before and after, and I can eventually find nice stuff, but I’m trying to do this on the fly so simple techniques are desirable.
I could think of a couple ways to deal with this:
Be very careful with what sequences or offsets you’re working with. In my limited experience playing around with this, a 2nd, 4th, or 5th added to another sequence is a lot more likely to produce something useful, at least in a sort of ‘normal’ diatonic scale. Anything other than those is more likely to get into the ‘sour’ range.
Quantize your sequences post-addition. This depends on if you’re really looking for something precise, though if you were I would think you’d sequence the variations directly in a single sequence from the beginning. If you’re looking to do things generatively, I think the quantization is better done after the voltages are combined. That way it acts as a ‘mask’ of the kinds of notes you can allow through.
Or, stop thinking about notes, mannnnn, and get out of the 12 TET box and like embrace the universe of sound mannnn.
My base sequence is pre-quantized, so yeah, I’ve tried re-quantizing afterwards. I’ve mostly been working with Hemisphere Suite’s Squanch and Dual Quantizer for these experiments. Looks like I should probably try scaling down my second sequencer so it’s easier to hit those intervals.
I’m currently enjoying my 12 TET box.
Yeah it would require another quantizer after most sequencers were already spitting out quantized voltage, which is a bummer. And yeah your second sequence would want to be of a very limited range, and possibly include some negative voltages if possible, to get more variety while keeping the produced sequence from being all over the place. Otherwise the intervals will leap that much further.
Kria’s version of doing this with ‘alternate notes’ is nice since in Kria you’re essentially sequencing scale steps rather than intervals. So like if had a C maj scale, and you combined an E (natural) with an E, in addition you end up with G#, because it’s two major thirds stacked on each other. But in a system like Kria’s, E is essentially “2 scale steps above root”, so adding two of those is “4 scale steps above root”, which is a G like we might expect, which is a much more conventionally “musically useful” value.
If you work entirely in whole tone scales you won’t have any problems, since they’ll always add to more whole tones. Or you could work entirely in 12 tones (i.e. using all of them) since any addition of two 12 TET voltages will equal a 12 TET voltage. Get out of the box mannnnn… (<---- that’s joking in case not obvious)