#488

Will do ! (In fact - send me a pm nowish - just as a prompt to make it easier to find you !!)

1 Like
#489

I am not the final authority on the subject, but after much research on my own, I donā€™t believe there is. By the time you get to 1:1 functionality, you are at more hp and more expensive than just getting a Maths.

If there are specific subsets of the module that you can take or leave, sure.

1 Like
#490

My advice is donā€™t start with too small a rack and get a real complex oscillator, like a furthrrrr generator. They are more than the sum of their parts.

2 Likes
#491

Complex oscillators are pretty special beasts and i personally donā€™t think they are good for starting.
A lot depends on what kind of sounds one wants to make. Complex oscillators tend to take up a lot of space and it might seem like a waste if one is not after their capabilities in sound.

1 Like
#492

Well, a small rack in my view is a recipe for frustration when one doesnā€™t yet know the modules one likes best, because hp is at such a premium.

I would say a complex oscillator is a window into what modular is all about and a source with tons of possibilities and fun.

I had no problems coming to grips with FG when I purchased it starting out with eurorack. On a simple level it can be treated as two separate oscillators with sync and multiple taps. The layout is intuitive.
FG in particular has built in tuners, and can do FM, AM, ring mod, linear and expo switch, LFO switch, noise mod etc. Personally I think it requires less skill than patching FM and AM with external VCAs, not to mention even/odd high/low waveshaping.

For example, look how much more expert this is

https://www.muffwiggler.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=76009&highlight=intellijel+west+coast

Also using a random osc to FM another one doesnā€™t always sound that good, whereas the oscs in complex oscillator are already matched for this.

2 Likes
#493

MN Function and Doepfer A171-2 are both equivalent to one channel of Maths (one of Mathsā€™ CHs 1 and 4, that is). But if you want two channels plus polarizing mixer in one module, Maths is the best choice.

1 Like
#494

piggybacking off of @Starthief - Iā€™m using my Stages for 3x S/H and the spare stages for triggered D and AD functions.

I used to rec the 2hp S/H for plain ol S/H but mine failed and 2hp said it was a design-wide problem so uh skip the 2hp SH.

also the Jinx looks like a fine solution but I found a quad buff mult on reverb in 4hp so iā€™m a little disappointed that Jinx isnā€™t quad bc in eurorack we need more things in quad (?)

3 Likes
#495

While not identical in functionality I think in how I mainly use Maths a flexible function generator plus Cold Mac could work, assuming mixing and attenuverting is available elsewhere in the system. Iā€™ve kind of tried to plan a system without one for space savings, but I donā€™t think itā€™s going anywhere unless I go smaller than 84hp or so. Itā€™s not a messiah module and one could easily do without, but it also has a lot of useful stuff in what is pretty reasonable hp, plus itā€™s quite ergonomic to use compared to trying to recreate it with 2hp modules or something.

1 Like
#496

I have Stages and Maths, and I can tell you that Stages is extremely useful, and like Maths I keep coming up with more ideas of things to try with it. It covers a lot of ground and is really maleable depending what direction your patch it fills so many holes.

2 Likes
#497

Thanks for your input. I ended up choosing the godspeed, not because it was complex per se, but because I wanted some oscillators that had their own flavour other than the ones on my grandmother. The through zero sounded fairly unique and gritty for the size! Down the road when I am growing my modular collection I will look at more full featured complex osc.

#498

I have both Stages and Maths, and find Maths a lot easier to learn and use. With Maths everything is clearly marked on the panel, and itā€™s all pretty obvious. Stages may be deeper in the sense of having more functions, but that comes only with some repeated study of the manual.

#499

It helps to think of Stages as smaller building blocks, like modular within a module. Itā€™s really all about what happens to a voltage over time, and each color represents a different way of reacting to an input or not. With those you can build bigger functions. When you look at it this way you realize that almost every function in the modular synth can be created by these parts in some way or another. Envelope, slew, lfo, vco, sequencer, switch, static voltage, sample and hold, a lot more Iā€™m forgettingā€¦ I find it a perfect companion to Maths because while they cover a lot of the same ground they approach things from different paradigms and each is better at certain things.

3 Likes
#500

Iā€™d really like to understand Stages better!

2 Likes
#501

Iā€™m in a bit of a dilemma here, would you go with top row and Quad VCA? Or bottom row with Shades and uVCA II?

#502

Iā€™d say bottom, but Iā€™m not a fan of the Quad VCAā€™s signal flow. Having the big knob be gain instead of attentuation is weird for audio use. Iā€™m in the minority here though, it would seem. Also, youā€™re going to dislike that Godspeedā€™s outputs are at the top. XD

Iā€™d probably drop Kinks. Itā€™s a good module, but Stages can do sample and hold, and rectification is cool, but Stages can do unipolar LFOā€™s. With 4 more HP, youā€™d have more options for filters, oscilators, or VCAā€™s. Marbles, Plaits, and Stages are all great and will give you lots to explore. You may also want an output module unless you have an external device that will comfortably take modular levels.

#503

I agree, Iā€™d go with Shades and uVCA. Thereā€™s not a lot here that needs VCAs (Plaits has itā€™s own internal LPG) so probably youā€™d be using VCA channels as more attenuators anyway.

I also agree about dropping Kinks, and Iā€™d say probably Ochd as well. 8 LFOs plus Stages is overkill in a small systemā€¦ unless you always plan to use Stages for more complex envelopes or as a sequencer.

#504

I donā€™t have the Marbles, Stages, or the Instruo LFO. But they all produce control voltages and have lots of outputs. Youā€™ve also got a load of CV coming from the midi interface (v/o and gates I guess).

Where are all these CVs going to go? What are you planning to do with them? Even four VCAs seems too few to me, only two seems like you wouldnā€™t be using the potential of this system. Iā€™d swap out the Triatt, stick in a dual VCA of a similar size. Why take up space with a set of attenuators here?

Edit: Maybe six VCAs would be overkill. But looking at my system I seem to have an average of 4-6 per row.

#505

Huh, I donā€™t look at that and think ā€œmore VCAsā€. There just arenā€™t that many modulation destinations, nor audio sources, to justify more than four. (Or two, for my preference.)

My setup is 12U 114HP, and my total VCAs include one Tallin, one Cold Mac and one Ripples. Thereā€™s also a Natural Gate. I never feel like thatā€™s insufficient for my needs or that Iā€™m missing opportunities by not having more VCAs.

(Granted, I have my modular integrated with Bitwig and can summon as many software VCAs as I wantā€¦ I just donā€™t need to unless Iā€™m using it to build a harmonic oscillator or something in Bitwig Grid.)

(And also granted, the VCAs in my system lean toward the minimalist side. It works for my purposes and style of music, where Iā€™m using a lot of manual control.)

1 Like
#506

Depends on your patching style. More complex, feedback patches require more VCAs.

#507

Well, thatā€™s exactly what I thought! Suppose one cv channel of the mutant brain is used for v/o, one for velocity. And the gate drives an envelope. Thatā€™s both channels of the DVCA gone already. What would the rest of the Mutant Brain then do?

If we think thereā€™s then a need for an attenuator as well, why not make that a VCA?

Itā€™s interesting that there are many different approaches here. However Iā€™d call out to the original poster that only 2 VCAs for that row is probably atypical, particularly given the number of modulation sources. As I say in my edit, six is probably overkill though.

For comparison, I have 10 rows of 84 hp (well, one row is half full). I have about 4 VCAs/LPGs per row, give or take. (A couple of rows are mainly FX)