#32

While it seems like this prompt is only somewhat vaguely defined, I also felt like the MS-20 is the closest to what OP is getting at. I agree that semi-modular lends itself to immediacy (patch and pull and you’re far less likely to end up with silence). It also feels very open in terms of choosing how you want to interface/control different aspects - keyboard pitch cv, keyboard gate, mod wheel cv, momentary push button gate, external sound to pitch conversion CV, external sound to envelope conversion CV, external sound to gate - all of these can control the most important aspects of the sound generation/processing on board. Also much of what makes something playable or immediate isn’t necessarily about routing but rather about controlling amounts of what’s routed. Part of why the MS20 panel is so great at letting what’s in your head flow directly into sound is the relatively large number of pre-routed attenuators on board that can be co-opted to attenuate other signals depending on how you wire up the patch panel.

2 Likes
#33

I think a modular can be an expressive instrument; but it has to stay stable and you have to practice a lot to get there. Some people are able to design the modular they want from the get go, then get good at using it, but for many other people there’s a long learning/experimentation (buying/selling) process before a modular reaches a set of static but flexible capabilities you get from an easel, or a synthi, or any other closed but flexible systems.

The type of control that favours performance is probably personal preference-- I’ve been blown away by people performing an existing patch; just tweaking parameters with knobs and switches, and also with people that patch and repatch live. I would like to be able to reach that level of fluidity myself. So patch cables and knobs aren’t necessarily a limitation.

There’s a wonderful extended interview with Richard Lainhart from I Dream Of Wires about designing a performance instrument-- he also draws a distinction between studio and performance instruments and spends a lot of time talking about designing an instrument for performance. He uses a buchla 200e and continuum as controller; apparently he even developed a single physical patch for years.

13 Likes
#34

What a wealth of knowledge, sad to hear he passed away not long after this interview.

1 Like
#35


http://www.doepfer.de/traut/traut_e.htm

4 Likes
#36

This is the kind of question that we all ask ourselves, explicitly or implicitly, but I’ve personally found that is a challenge to work through and a task that is easily derailed. I would suggest that the question be reframed. Instead of “what instruments are playable,” I would ask yourself “how would I like to interact with an instrument.” Upthread you clarified that you are specifically “not really interested in diff ‘sounds’ but control of them,” so I think this is actually what you are asking, but by reframing it explicitly this way, the focus is where it belongs — with the player, not the instrument.

The advantage of a modular synthesizer is that it’s an open-ended system that you design and which has an infinite ability to be reconfigured. The disadvantage of a modular synthesizer is that it’s an open-ended system that you design and which has an infinite ability to be reconfigured. In contrast, the advantage of the (original) Minimoog is that it is a self-contained system that has well-defined limits, and the disadvantage of the Minimoog is that it is a self-contained system that has well-defined limits.

To focus your question further you could provide more details about what you need out of your instrument and what trade-offs you are willing to make. The expressiveness of an instrument is 100% about the performer, and that performer’s ability is dependent on spending a significant amount of time honing their skill. I would argue, with only slight exaggeration, that one could devote one’s entire life to the Korg Monotron. It looks like a toy, but is it really that much less expressive than a flute? Of course that doesn’t mean you could devote your life to it or that it satisfies any or your personal criteria. What is it about an instrument that would inspire you to come back hour after hour, day after day?

6 Likes
#37

Screen Shot 2020-05-19 at 3.03.12 AM
Screen Shot 2020-05-19 at 3.03.12 AM554×519 94.1 KB
Screen Shot 2020-05-19 at 3.03.22 AM Screen Shot 2020-05-19 at 3.03.32 AM

Howe, H. S. (1972). Compositional Limitations of Electronic Music Synthesizers. Perspectives of New Music, 10(2), 120-129.

fun fact: H.S. Howe wrote the Buchla 100 manual.

13 Likes
#38

One thing I’ve found helpful with the MS, and I suppose could be applied to any other patch cable synth, is that adding additional expressive or playable controls doesn’t have to be so complex. I think a lot of people get really hung up on things like needing an expensive touch sequencer or multi-axis controller or something like that. While the VCA and mod wheel and trigger button already offer a lot along with the built in attenuation you mentioned it only costs a few bucks to pick up or put together a cheap A/B or A/B/Y footswitch, or a volume pedal which can be used for either volume or as an attenuator, or just wire up a few simple things like rotary switches and some jacks. Small things like this can add a great deal of options without breaking the bank.

#39

is there a mod for the MS instruments that allows scalable tuning? the obligatory semitone quantization is prohibitive for me…

#40

in a way I suppose- its not like it will get anything accurate but you could just for example take the keyboard CV out, run it into an attenuator or the VCA with the mod wheel controlling it, and then run it into the oscillator CV inputs to change the range the keyboard has until you get something you like. But if you want specific scale systems then I guess you would need some sort of controller/sequencer/external keyboard that supported hz/v and did microtuning. its the one real shame with the mini that there is so little midi implementation, so no pitch bend

1 Like
#41

Thank you for posting this - fascinating. I’m really intrigued by this idea - something to explore!

#42

OP mentioned it, but I am drawn to this one because of the obvious nod to Synthi user interface with the ability to store and instantly recall presets via the digitally controlled patch matrix:

Would also point out that the Easel can store presets digitally via the iProgram card (although I think there are problems with it supporting newer iOS versions.) The 208c is supposed to have more of a 200e style present manager at some point.

#43

Novation mono station isn’t true analogue. However patches can be built from scratch and saved. They can be changed on the fly when being played back on the internal sequencer. You can record cc changes also.

It has midi in,out and thru. Plus CV , gate and aux cv.

https://novationmusic.com/en/circuit/circuit-mono-station

#44

Interesting thread. I do use a Buchla Music Easel as my main instrument. I find this instrument is at its best when the control is hands on. It’s an instrument which needs to be learned and requires a degree of familiarity with the elements and dexterity in utilising them. However, in a live performance environment, I like to give myself a bit of a break by using an Octatrack along with an MUC MIDI to CV converter to handle some of the modulation and clock the thing via an AUX card. I also own a Bitstream 3X, which is perfect for Norns.

2 Likes
#45

I’m doing some plumbutter research this evening, and am kind of surprised that it doesn’t have its own equipment thread on lines. To YouTube!

1 Like
#46

It’s fairly well documented here and at mw as well. Ciat instruments are a blast.

#47

It’s kind of fun traveling through the lines time machine. And yeah, looks like a lot of fun! This synth doc is really well done.

4 Likes
#48

I’ve made a series of videos about the Plumbutter. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLP00NMQyOtBn4Z8gyfXqRtEgezEvU3AoB

2 Likes
#49

Not modular, but an old school playable synth, just for the memories:

1 Like
#50

How is it not? The product uses Bass Station II’s synth engine in paraphonic form. The Bass Station’s oscillators are analogue triangle-cores. They have digital sync but that’s actually a good innovation, you don’t have to tune them, no?

The filter is a Roland-style OTA SVF. The overdrive and the distortion are analogue too.

The EG and LFO are digital but who cares? That gives you better control.

To drive this tangent back to the subject matter: I think there seems to be an unspoken assumption in this discussion, that purely digital instruments are not what we are looking for.

If this weren’t the case, there are plenty of modern examples of fantastic instruments with great expressiveness (playability), control (composability), and patch recall. Modern examples would be a Nord Stage, or a Shuriken Variax guitar.

If you want an analog signal path, most affordable options are paraphonic at best which I find extremely limiting. I wouldn’t suggest any single voice instruments. Not only are chords problematic, long-release reverberation being cut short by the signal path playing another note tends to be jarring. So monophony limits your expressiveness.

Therefore, if money is no object and you’re looking for an analog synthesizer, the Moog One is a polyphonic synthesizer with patch recall and terrific expressiveness and control.

But there is a yet un-mentioned hybrid that I find very intriguing: the KORG Minilogue XD. Comes in a keyboard form or as a module. It supports four voice polyphony, each of which consists of 2 analog VCOs. There’s a digital multi-engine on top of it which provides digital oscillators and effects. Patch storage and recall is very quick. It even has rudimentary eurorack CV IN x2 and clock IN and OUT. This would be my instrument of choice for the OP.

Unless you really want more tactile modularity in which case nothing beats a modular at that :sweat_smile:

1 Like
#51

I think my post hit’s some but not all of the targets in the OP. It’s a suggestion because I like it. That’s it really.