#973

question for owners about noise engineering oscillators, especially Cursus and Loquelic - do you still have the need to process their output further or are these more of a one stop shops, in a sense?

I am looking for something to accompany DPO and I was set on one of these, but I kind of get the feeling that they are a complete package, while lately I’ve been discovering that I prefer to manipulate processing rather than source and having a module that goes straight to vca/lpg seems… boring?

on the other hand joranalogue’s generate 3 looks very interesting and I completely ignored it’s existence so far, maybe I got too fixed on “I’ve got an analog oscillator, I have to get something digital”

1 Like
#974

Loqeulic Iteritas can definitely get pretty crazy on it’s own but there’s no reason you can’t process it downstream. If you want to treat it like a standard oscillator, dial in a specific waveshape and then send that through a wavefolder or a filter or use amplitude modulation etc. there’s noting stopping you.

I have noticed that because these oscillators have so many modulation inputs a lot of people have the tendency to send a bunch of modulation at once which can result in chaos. I was definitely guilty of this when I first got it (and I got some nice sounds this way!) but if you are more selective about what you modulate on the Loquelic there’s still plenty of room for further processing.

#975

I have a Cursus. I find that a lot of noise eng modules tend to be more crunchy and sharp, which is not a big part of my sonic style, so I do a lot of filtering and comoression or saturation after to keep it more in the mix, especially with pads and drums from non euro synths. My current setup is Cursus into overdriven Raging Bull into Sinc Bucina at 0dB for the VCA (sometimes filter if I need to filter a less steep slope) into Autodyne with sidechain fielder on to balance out the dynamics of crossing multiple octaves into Pico dsp reverb at about 30% to put it more in the background of the miz

#976

thanks for your input @Versipellis @hinterlands! after browsing through the demos I was under the impression nobody treats it like a standard oscillator, so I started thinking maybe it’s not suited for that or something…

1 Like
#977

I’m looking for some kind of preset voltage module that trigger four voltages at once, and has a built-in slew for each voltage. Only thing I can find is the Dnipro Metamorph, but there’s no info on how slow the glide can go. I’m looking for something that can slew for longer than 60 seconds. Any suggestions? I don’t need quantised voltages.

#978

One thing to keep in mind is that the Loquelic is Noise Engineering’s take on complex oscillator, sort of like a digital DPO. Each of the three algorithms are different, but at it’s core it’s two digital oscillators frequency/phase modulating each other and then sent through a wavefolder. It will sound quite different than your DPO obviously but it’s worth noting that there are some similarities.

#979

I was looking at Tetrapad and I believe it can do this, though i don’t know the max slew time

#980

I have the Metamorph and like it a lot. Kinda like Pressure Points & Brains in one plus some and without the finicky touch plates. Sadly, for you, the internal slew is only around 3 secs max, so you’d at least need an external slew limiter that gives you a more generous slew time.

#981

I think MI Frames would do what you want. If you feed it an LFO it can go as slow as you like. . .
Do you want the slews for the four voltages to be different speeds? That might take a little more planning but could still be possible.

1 Like
#982

Seconding Frames + slow LFO. You could easily make enough keyframes such that each voltage arrives at different times. Unfortunately any LFO solution has the potential issue of needing your LFO to dwell at a value after it arrives…

Or if you want to morph 8 values between stored voltages, Emblematic’s Catalyst is great for that.

1 Like
#983

Polyend Preset maybe? Not sure about the slew, though.

#984

I was hoping someone with a DPO could check/explain something for me.

When fold is fully CCW and silenced, if angle is being modulated by the Mod Bus, I can hear VCO A in the final output. Is that expected behaviour?

I’m guessing it’s just a quirk, but it does mean you can’t use fold/strike as a VCA if angle is being modulated as the final output is never silenced.

#985

Yes, I see/hear the same behaviour.

1 Like
#986

Nice one thanks - easy enough quirk to live with I guess!

#987

Hey team, I’m going in a different direction in my musical exploration/adventures and wanted some thoughts/tips. I’ve got a 4U 104hp rack that I am going to expand in to a 7U and with that extra space, I wanted to open up my sonic pallet. Before, I’ve been mainly ambient, or based around single layer sound design. This is the rack I was using before:

Its awesome and expressive, but slightly limiting. I can’t really PERFORM with it the way I would like unless, as I mentioned before, it is more ambient. I have wanted more structure, quantization and potentially downtempo/electronic style sounds to my work. As well, I have my rig in my home office, meaning the laptop and all the potential comes with it. So, this is where I believe I’m heading:

Screenshot 2020-04-26 14.31.25
Screenshot 2020-04-26 14.31.252126×1274 1.1 MB

Now, because I am getting a bit more FORM out of what I am doing, there’s a few questions I have:

  1. Should I get a smaller function generator? I’m not sure what to expect with the maths, since I’ve never used one. It seems super handy, but 20hp isn’t a joke!

  2. I love the granular opportunities of the arbhar and feel like this is the tool for me, but I continue to look at the morphagene. I get the feeling that some of what the morphagene can do with samples can be done with the 301. I am wondering if I am TOTALLY off base here.

  3. I have a JOVE System 80 PCB and ordered the parts, but think that maybe after the build I might sell it (or stash it) and use an Instruo I-o47 instead. The JOVE feels like it might be a bit more limited in sound… Has anybody here had experience with both?

Any and all recommendations about this rack are welcome, btw. Like, Does the Cold Mac make sense, should I replace my uO_c with my uBraids… I plan to use an OP-1, OP-Z and Polyend Tracker along with this build. Other equipment is a norns, 16n and a grid to round it out.

I know its a lot and just saying “I want to have more groove to my sounds” doesn’t particularly get us SO FAR in the recommendation area, but I was wondering if there’s any glaring holes in this line up. Thanks!

#988

a few thoughts:

  • I’m not sure you need crow, es-8 and polyend poly 2 in this system. crow will be able to do a lot of sequencing to er-301, and to just friend, via i2c.
  • about the maths: small modules are cool in term of features, but larger modules can bring a nicer interface to play with. Maths is definitely nice for that.
  • You already have a multimode filter in there (3S), Jove should be fine.
  • If you want a system that feels nice to perform with, more vca/attenuverters with nice knobs would help.
    *Adding the er-301 is cool, but it’s a module that enjoy more control options (like the 16n via i2c).

And now the part that you might not want to read:
The system you currently have should be enough for what you want to do. Of course, if you want to make the whole music in modular, nothing in the laptop etc, you will have to buy a lot more stuff.

But with your system you already have a lot of sequencing power, a couple of voices, and some efffects. You might want to upgrade a some point, and I get that :slight_smile: But if you can’t make the sounds you want know, start by going deep in the module you already have. Half of your current rack + a laptop would already be fine for downtempo/electronica.

4 Likes
#989

I really feel that Maths is worth its 20HP.

I would say, if you want to go for the ER-301, see how you like it and what it can do for you before you buy other modules. But also, try out integrating your modular with a DAW and see if that doesn’t cover the same bases that an ER-301 would for you…

To me, Bitwig acts as a mixer, effects host and recorder, but also as a sort of “ultra Disting” – letting me add more utilities on demand, or even build a synth patch to work with the hardware. And that’s kind of what I was using the ER-301 for, aside from trying to substitute for too many Eurorack modules that I already loved.

That said, I think the ER-301 really shines with buffer manipulation, granular etc.

6 Likes
#990

Maths is so much more than just a function generator! It is a set of building blocks that can be used a countless number of ways. Look through the Illustrated Patch Guide for some ideas. IMO it is well worth the space, and you can’t really duplicate its functionality cheaper or in less space.

3 Likes
#991

Has anyone here tried any of the Feedback Pre modules? I was looking at adding one of them but I wasn’t sure which of the three to go with. I would be using it primarily for distortion/saturation rather than straight up eq. I’m thinking the Feedback Pre BX is the most versatile of the three but the Pre KM might be the most characterful.

#992

I will have a greater ability to connect my DAW and my modular once I get both the Poly2 and ES-8 in the rack. I think this will really help expand what I’m doing.

Some of the reasons the 301 really excites me is because I can use the i2c teletype to create a lot of randomized yet controlled randomness to many different aspects of my sounds. It seems like a great tool for this. One of the things with the ES-8 that I was interested in was taking sounds IN to VCV or Bitwig and having the DAW function mainly as an effects box for those.

I don’t particularly LOVE being in the DAW for song writing, sequencing or softsynths. I enjoy the FX and manipulation that can happen there. The DC coupling of the ES-8 would allow me to do all the fun CV stuff I would like to do with modulation stuff as well…

Maybe the ER-301 is a bit of overkill, I don’t know. I love the IDEA of it, how it can just function as a swiss army knife in a rack and allow for all kinds of things including mixing, sound generation and a closer relationship to the TT…

Its nice knowing that I’m not missing too much with the other tools in the box. And yes @electret has a good point about being able to make much of what I already want. I have felt slightly limited in keeping things moving, in a way, as if I have to do a big chunk in the DAW and the rack suppliments. I would like for it to be the other way around.

Plus, I have a 16n built and accidentally got a free second PCB with faceplate, which is pretty sweet, so one of those as a 16n control surface sounds pretty snazzy.

2 Likes