#452

So, I didn’t totally get this until very recently, but I think of it as the difference setting up your signal chain as a guitar player with a pedal board vs a front of house sound person. As a guitar player, it’s a mostly linear chain, you go from A to Z adding things along the way. With a mixing board you bring all the sources into the main hub and the distribute them back out to create a bunch of parallel processing loops with busses and aux sends.

This whole time I’ve been into modular I’ve been treating my setup like a sound person, but I’ve been not digging my workflow recently and couldn’t figure out why. Then about a week ago, I played a show on guitar, with a few pedals but not synths, and I realized how freeing it was. My brain works better in a linear way when I’m trying to improvise, it can’t process things as quickly when I’m thinking liking a mix engineer. I was also feeling like playing my modular was beginning to feel more like being a dj and less like playing an instrument.

I pulled my Pittsburgh System Interface out of my case and stripped everything down to linear path, and its feeling way better. I have an X-pan on order and I’ll probably get the Xoh as my final output module.

9 Likes
#453

Thanks for your comment, I think this is really helpful for me. I have to admit, without having used a “complete” mixer yet, I don’t find the routing intuitive. As with modular there is the potential for either playing a single voice (single instrument) or at the other extreme you might be performing with multiple voices, percussion etc. Perhaps the situation influences which people prefer.

1 Like
#454

I rather think the Make Noise distributed mixing philosophy occupies a middle position between the “linear” single voice analogy (guitar+pedals) and the “front of house” bring-multiple-voices-together-in-a-master-mix analogy.

If you watch enough MN videos, I think you’ll find a pattern: a patch begins with a very simple idea that produces a sound. That idea is then elaborated. The elaboration rarely stops at a single monophonic synth part. Rather, additional sounds are usually added through effects and/or by spinning off additional voices that aren’t truly independent of the original one: modulation sources are at least partially shared, as is the overall mix. The results is something complex, but it’s not really polyphony in the sense of a guitar or piano, where you can pluck or hammer one or more similar strings. Like a guitar or piano, the Shared System (and its ilk) remains a single instrument, but exploring its reconfigurability (patching) within its limitations is how it is played. In this way, distributed mixing enhances the reconfigurability of the audio path in the Shared System, encouraging the player to mingle multiple sounds at different points in the patch.

34 Likes
#455

Such a perceptive comment. You just gave me a bit of a eureka moment for precisely why working within my relatively modest eurorack system (where modulation sources are often shared out of practical restriction/necessity, and are often themselves linked to one another in some way - Just Friends, Marbles, shared and intermingled clock sources) is so much more satisfying and produces much more interesting results than working within more “powerful” or infinitely expansive setups. You also made me realize that Make Noise has some deeper meanings and intentions behind “Shared System” as a name than what I assumed (this has probably already been discussed in this mammoth thread, but worth pointing out again maybe)

5 Likes
#456

I’d agree with naxuu; a very insightful comment from mdoudoroff that I’m still considering in the context of the make noise modules and system. One question that did occur is the role of the rxmx. I don’t have the CV bus (though I have other modules that serve a similar purpose). However it would seem to fit the point raised if the rxmx could distribute signals as well as mix them. Frankly I’m not even sure if this is possible (and my rig is currently not accessible to check). However, I guess this is partly the role of the CV bus, so should also be considered part of the distributed mixing approach.

#457

on a cosmetic / superficial note - in the sense of Robert M. Pirsig’s idea of a ‘romantic’ understanding vs. a “classical” understanding of an object - i like how the black & gold faceplate catches the light, in low light scenarios. How the gold lines and the white lines/labeling (ink/print or whatever) appear at diff angles… it reminds me of instances (landing / taking off in commercial airplanes) where various things (buildings, windows, cars, bodies of water, etc.) are glinting / reflecting the light from a low sun… it’s a dazzling sort of visual effect. the print and the lines (on the faceplate) have a kind of relief that really pops and dances at different angles. I catch myself admiring the appearance of it more than i’d like to admit. sorry for the random thought / straying from the current thread of discussion.

9 Likes
#458

Sorry if this is really simple, but…

I’ve got a Shared System.

I’ve got a Rosie in another case.

I am thinking about getting an XPAN, and also wondering about the XOH.

Does the XOH make any sense in this context? I don’t need headphone or line out, I just want stereo mixing (and panning would be great)…

Thanks!

#459

I have a MN bus case and get a lot of use out of the XPAN. Being able to place voices in the stereo field adds a huge dimension to your system.

3 Likes
#460

Tha, that’s what I suspected. but the XOH is pretty redundant in a shared system case with an XPAN, right?

#461

They have different uses. XPan is something of a mixer, but it’s primarily useful to give mono signals stereo interest and/or cross-fade between mono sources under CV control. It doesn’t have a headphone out, just a left/right out, and it doesn’t have control over master level.

XOH allows you to manually set the relative levels of two stereo signals, and it has a headphone out which has a volume control. It has no CV control.

Neither really has the send/return that Rosie has, nor the cue functionality. They all sit in different places.

7 Likes
#462

Besides lacking CV controls, the XOH is limiting because it is designed as a end of chain device.

If you are looking for a module to simply mix stereo signals, I’d recommend the knob.farm hyrlo. It has three stereo inputs (or mono to stereo) and modular level outputs. And it comes in black & gold :slight_smile:

2 Likes
#463

That looks really nice. Actually Ooots, Hyrlo and Ferry together would be a lovely stereo mixer setup in quite low hp.

Nice to be spoilt for stereo mixer options all of a sudden. Some interesting combos possible between these:

36

3 Likes
#464

I just got an X-Pan, it’s pretty neat but something to remember is that there are no attenuators for incoming channels, so that is something you to have to consider as well because while you are mixing the relative volumes of each side of the fade there it’s nice to have incoming volume control for each source. Luckily I already have some attenuators already so not a big deal but something to think about. I’m in the process of changing my mixing setup to something more akin to the Make Noise paradigm and its takes a bit of getting used to but I’m enjoying it so far.

3 Likes
#465

I’ve finally cracked the manual on Wogglebug and I noticed this little gem:

image
image828×896 166 KB

Absolutely incredible.

23 Likes
#466

I had the Wogglebug for a while and I never understood what “External” and “Influence” jacks did. LOL.

1 Like
#467

That’s a shame because that means you missed out on a couple of the most unique features of one of the best random modules, ever.

The External input is nothing more or less than the input to the S&H. It’s just like the input to any S&H. With a regular S&H, that input would completely replace the internal noise source. In the Wogglebug, the noise source remains available, and you can mix the two signals with the Ego/Id pot.

The Influence input simultaneously does four things:

  • modulates frequency of the Smooth VCO (the leftmost audio source up top)
  • modulates frequency of the Woggle VCO (the rightmost audio source up top)
  • provides an additional input to the Ring-Mod circuit (the middle audio source up top)
  • modulates the level of the Woggle CV signal

Either accepts audio-rate signals as well as non-audio-rate signals.

29 Likes
#468

I use the “disturb button” to freeze the S&H a lot as a performance “button to hit when I need to do something interesting.” Given how much fun triggering hold is on the Mimeophon…I really wish that disturb button was cv gate-able. It’s been a while since I’ve read the manual…I’m not missing something obvious right? That button is the only way to freeze the s&h…right?

#469

I don’t have one to test at the moment, but can’t you insert a dummy cable in the clock input jack to stop it?

1 Like
#470

Definitely. Or you could turn the clock all the way down…as the clock is cv controllable…could do a “freeze” like thing by stopping the clock. SOLVED

4 Likes
#471

Ah, ok, I thought so. I wish the labeling was a little more clear. TBH, I had fun with the Wogglebug, and may buy one again at some point, but it was one of the few modules that also really annoyed me because of how much the circuit was intertwined. I personally prefer tools that I can learn and get repeatable results if I want to, and I felt like no matter how hard I tried, the Wogglebug never responded in a way that was exactly how I expected. And, I’m pretty sure that’s how its designed to be, I just don’t jive with that mentality. It would be like if you swung a hammer and then it poured you a glass of water. Or, more like if you swung a hammer and it went backwards then hit the nail twice. LOL. I like knowing what output it will give depending on what input I provide it.