#104

QMMF-4: Four discreet multimode filters that can either self-oscillate (conventional) or not (similar circuitry to RES-4); each provides its own V/OCT input and attenuverted FM input; each has it’s own VCA (post-filter), and indeed, each has its own input. Input and output buses are provided if you want to treat the entire unit as a filterbank. Not stereo, but you can patch it in a stereo manner. No macro controls (along the lines of SPAN or RADIATE) other than a master FM that affects all four filters equally. (It’s otherwise up to you to patch up whatever animation you want to each filter separately.) I would describe the QMMF-4 as a comparatively generalized studio tool. The QMMF-4 is not notably playable. It is notably good at pinging in RES mode (it is an elaborated RES-4) and independent pitching of each filter is a plus there. It’s decent at formants if you’ve got the time and persistence to set them up. It is capable of adding nice saturation, and it can certainly can do swishy/phasery-sounding stuff with moving peaks and notches.
Top-of-the-line components and stability/predictability with (staggering) price and size to match. Cwejman character (whatever that means, but it’s a thing… maybe a bit clinical).

2 Likes
#105

Not to hijack the MakeNoise thread, but the best thing about all these stereo modules in my opinion is that its now way easier to route feedback around my rack :slight_smile:

3 Likes
#106

I’m definitely more drawn to the SSF in this category. Seems like it has a broader range of musical uses. No way to know til I play either of them though.
And when it comes to buying more modules (when I’m really pretty well set) it always comes back to the question of what additional Mannequins unit(s) I could buy with the same money ;-). 3S included in this case.

#107

After thinking about this alot, I think the comparison to Three Sisters is misplaced. The difference between 1-to-4-in 1-to-4-out and 1-in 4-out x2 is pretty massive.

I’m drawn to the QPAS and the Sisters mostly because I have only two hands. Sure CV control; but for my use, having thoughtful master controls that manipulate sound in complex ways is very desirable.

Prism seems to meet that need too in a different way I think, but I would need to hear more.

1 Like
#109

I’m in …can’t wait

#110

Anyone know why there’s two frequency CV controls? I can’t figure it out. Do the two filters have their own frequency? (One knob but two CV controls is confusing me).

The manual isn’t posted yet, and I don’t see anything in the 7 minute demo video that explains it. I haven’t watched the live stream…is this obvious and I’m just not seeing it?

#111

One is probably calibrated for 1v/o while the other has an attenuverter for general frequency modulation.

#112

what I (completely idly) wondered was if the attenuated frequency input was linear or exponential.

#113

My assumption is that the main knob is a frequency offset applied to both filters, while there are CV inputs for each of the two filters, with the CV for the first normalled to the second if you want to CV them together.

#114

My Sisters has almost always been patched in stereo in the past few months… I think this will be replacing it. Smile Pass in stereo is just magically liquid.

1 Like
#115

ahhh, the big winner of this video for me is actually the audio-rate modulation into the “chk-chk” input that sounds like a weird combo between AM and sample-rate reduction!

…I guess this probably joins Akemie’s Taiko, Rings and, you know, actual general-purpose VCAs in my hypothetical, never-to-be-realized second row :joy:

8 Likes
#116

Yeah, that was another thing Walker Farrell explained in the chat – one unattenuated, one attenuated. Both of them apply equally to left and right sides.

#117

How much does this thing cost, like $500 ?

if anything, it only makes me realize i can (should) be patching with my existing filter(s) more creatively

2 Likes
#118

$379 of 20 characters.

1 Like
#120

As others have said, it’s most likely one with an attenuverter, one without (to make it easier to track 1V/oct).

IMO, filters should always have at least 2 CV inputs, and really 2 audio inputs too. In a typical “East-coast” style patch, you’re going to want to track the keyboard and add modulation to the filter frequency cutoff. Also, it makes feedback patching much more straightforward.

It’s even better if they have attenuverters on the CV input (and audio input, but that’s more unusual). Inverted audio out back into a frequency CV input is a particularly fun patch…

#121

I was also in the stream chat, and re:1v/o, I recall not seeing a concrete response. Maybe I’m missing a step on this inquiry, but it’s apparently impossible to get it to self-oscilate even with feedback patching - which is something Walker did say. I recall the stream showing pitching the resonance around a bit, but I dunno if we should expect perfect pitch tracking? :thinking: I’m certainly looking forward to the manual!

#122

This is somewhat of a personal plug, but for anyone who owns the QMMG or other multiple filters and aches for the single-source control that QPAS has to offer, may I humbly suggest you look at the ADDAC306 control module (which I collaborated on with Andre from ADDAC System).

ADDAC306_front
ADDAC306_front.jpg622×712 51.1 KB

One single CV input will allow you to control up to 5 parameters on your filter. That way you can move bands, change resonances etc, with one control (hands-on or CV). Just something to keep in mind to help you tame that GAS. It’s modular after all - lots of ways to achieve things.

13 Likes
#124

The QPAS doesn’t track 1v/oct, for several reasons:

  1. The existence of the Radiate controls would basically make this impossible since they go in multiple directions.

  2. The character of the stereo imaging is directly related to the particular expo response, as detailed in Tony’s dev story on the website:

the effect is heightened when the filter has an exponential response and the cutoff is modulated. At lower cutoff frequencies the two channels appear to move at similar velocities, but as the cutoff frequency increases, one channel will smoothly increase in velocity, becoming brighter faster. The other channel lags behind, but eventually reaches the same velocity, and finally at high cutoff frequencies the two channels coalesce into full brightness.

Yes, 1v/oct is expo response, but the design goal for this filter is to emphasize the animated character of filter sweeps, and that was therefore the empasis during development.

  1. The filters, by design, do not self-oscillate. In many cases volt per octave tracking on a filter is a way to sort of use it as a VCO, which is not so relevant here. This also plays into the choice of tailored response curve vs 1/octave.
20 Likes
#125

Yeah, I keep getting the comparison but I don’t agree with it. Cold Mac is as far from becoming obsolete by the appearance of ADDAC306 as Frames is. I’d be weary to downplay Cold Mac to filter controller usage. Plus it would be very hard if not impossible to set it up so that your frequency bands move in a specified way, whereas with 306 you can have the move how you want. Not sure if the comparison is really necessary, apart from the centralized control concept (which is far from new).

4 Likes
#126

Oh and regarding the two FREQ CV inputs: 1 has attenuverter, 2 is unity, and they are summed with the offset from the panel control.

3 Likes