
The World of Modular Synthesizers (2013) - pmoriarty
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/apr13/articles/modular-synths.htm
======
jarmitage
The documentary I Dream of Wires (2014) [1, 2] provides both an extensive and
entertaining summary of the history and state of the art in modular
synthesisers.

There is some extremely cool stuff coming out today. Buchla is still making
insane gear like this rhythm generator [3, 4]. Some smart friends in London
have made a programmable guitar pedal / module that can run Pure Data patches,
they also have an Emscripten + Web Audio API powered sharing platform for same
patches [5].

[1] [http://www.idreamofwires.org/](http://www.idreamofwires.org/)

[2]
[http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3636334/](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3636334/)

[3]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W7IVvYWT69g](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W7IVvYWT69g)

[4]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OE8qHrRx-g](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OE8qHrRx-g)

[5] [http://hoxtonowl.com](http://hoxtonowl.com)

Edit: [5] is open source software, firmware and hardware

Edit re software vs. hardware: Besides as has been mentioned that comparing
software and hardware is a bit silly, I think it's missing the point to argue
in favour of one or the other. A few unordered reasons why:

> Learning through making and programming together complement each other in a
> way only those who've experienced it truly understand.

> It's never been cheaper to buy synth hardware, esp. for the sake of learning
> e.g. Arduino, MakeyMakey, littleBits. And, it's never been easier to go to a
> hack space and get taught how to put a synth together (see workshops on
> [http://musichackspace.org](http://musichackspace.org), more springing up in
> Europe at least – where are you, US music hackers?)

> Just like in most fields, the boundaries between software and hardware are
> becoming less distinguishable, as the Hoxton Owl project [5] clearly shows.
> This makes it the most exciting time to be interested in both music software
> and hardware!

------
tibbon
Over the past 3 years I've assembled a 21U eurorack modular (in addition to my
otherwise relatively large synth collection) and it's been the best thing
ever.

Freedom from traditional keyboards (I generally use a Makenoise Rene +
Pressure Points, although occasionally will use a Moog Voyager as a
controller) has really opened things up for me.

I know that I'll never get the same sound again, and everything feels very
fresh and creative. While I don't think I ever made a 'original' sound on
guitar, I think that many days I am hearing things that might actually be new,
or at least relatively unexplored.

Its also overall slowed down my wants to buy additional synths, effects pedal,
etc since I have nearly every possibility in this. The only significant
purchase I've done in about a year aside from more modules has been an
Eventide H3000.

Plus, it looks badass. I've even performed with it live a few times. I've
wanted one since circa 2002, but only recently could afford it. Totally worth
it.

Sounds at soundcloud.com/tibbon

~~~
louthy
> Eventide H3000.

What an absolutely legendary machine. This is a classic example of where the
plugin version can't compete with hardware of what 30 years ago? Although the
plugin is still good, it just doesn't come close to a real H3000.

I actually just bought UAD emulation of the first Eventide harmoizer (H910),
and it's pretty amazing. But I haven't been able to compare it to the original
like I have with the H3000, so can't say how close it is to the original.

~~~
readymade
A bit OT, but how are you liking the UAD stuff? I know a few folks who have
made the leap and feel pretty happy with it. Been thinking of snagging one of
the new Apollos.

~~~
louthy
I massively rate them. Had the Quad PCI for a few years now and it changed my
productions overnight. What's good is you get all of the plugins installed and
you can click demo to try any of them out immediately. Some emulations are
exact (for example EMT250 reverb, Pultec EQ), some are close and have the
correct tone but aren't the same as the originals (SSL channel strip for
example), some are quite far away but are useful in their own right (mostly
the tape plugins like the Ampex and Studer).

This is my full set:

Eventide H910 Harmonizer

AMS RMX16 (reverb)

Oxford Inflator

Oxford EQ

Ampex ATR-102

Lexicon 224

Studer A800

Precision Enhancer Hz

Precision Enhancer KHz

Precision Maximizer

Precision Multiband Compressor

Precision Limiter

EMT140 reverb

EMT250 reverb

Moog Filter

SPL Transient Designer

Roland RE-201 Space Delay

Roland Dimension D

Teletronix LA-2A Compressor

1176LN limiter

1176SE limiter

Pultec EQ

Cambridge EQ

DreamVerb

RealVerbPro

A good friend of mine has a lot of the real gear listed above, and even has a
Series B SSL desk, so that guided me to the purchases, but also allowed me to
do direct comparisons. I like the way they essentially re-build the machine's
components in code (so they'll measure the input and outputs of all of the
real components at various energy levels and then emulate them and 'plug' them
together as code modules, pretty impressive.

Some plugins really take a lot of juice though, especially some of the newer
ones where they're being more ambitious (Eventide, Studer, Ampex, AMX). I am
considering getting an Octo to go alongside the Quad. That should last me a
few years.

Offloading the plugin processing is very very handy as well, I rarely get the
audio glitches because of a lack of CPU like I used to before.

So yeah, I recommend them highly.

~~~
readymade
Cheers, thanks for the insight! :)

~~~
louthy
No problem :) I forgot to say, that until yesterday I hadn't ever run out of
juice with the Quad and thought 'that's too soon'. It's usually because I have
a channel-strip plugin on every channel, got mastering plugins on the master,
and tons of effects buses. The Eventide was the first plugin that pushed the
DSP so much that half-way through a track I ran out of DSP - that's the only
reason I'm considering upgrading.

------
bane
If you want to mess around with a software based modular synth that tries to
replicate more expensive hardware ones in a cheap package I highly suggest the
Caustic app. It's free for desktop OSs and cheap for mobile devices and has a
great community.

[http://singlecellsoftware.com/](http://singlecellsoftware.com/)

~~~
ChrisArgyle
+1 on the Caustic recommendation. The mobile version is perfect when you want
to explore ideas without being chained to your workstation.

------
eweise
Moog just released a relatively inexpensive semi-modular
[http://www.moogmusic.com/products/semi-
modular/mother-32](http://www.moogmusic.com/products/semi-modular/mother-32)

~~~
akurilin
This guide is decent as well if you're interested in getting an analog synth:
[http://thesynthesizersympathizer.blogspot.com/2015/03/buying...](http://thesynthesizersympathizer.blogspot.com/2015/03/buying-
your-first-analog-synthesizer.html)

Not modular, but I've been really happy with my Sub 37. In retrospect I could
have gone the fully digital route with a MIDI keyboard, it's a cheaper and
safer way to start if you're not sure that's your cup of tea. Having an actual
physical thingy to tweak can be pretty magical though, especially once you
figure out what the dozens of knobs do and how things interact.

Would also recommend [http://www.syntorial.com/](http://www.syntorial.com/) to
get started in synths.

------
misthop
This is very cool. I'm just starting to get into synths myself. Anybody who
wants to take a deep dive into synths should take a look at the Synth Secrets
series [0] from Sound on sound. ~60 articles on what synth is and how it works
in great detail.

[0]-
[http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/allsynthsecrets.htm](http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/allsynthsecrets.htm)

~~~
anigbrowl
Seconding this. Gordon Reid's _synth Secrets_ tutorials are unsurpassed by any
book or course that I know of.

------
chipsy
The way I got into synthesis was with Jeskola Buzz. [0] You can still use it
today... Free and community-driven, it has lots of modules, some are unique
and brilliant, just as many are dodgy and likely to crash.

In terms of making electronic music, it's far easier to stick to a simple
sample-driven workflow than to actually dive into synth programming, but
there's a special joy in dialing in exactly the timbre you want.

[0] [http://www.buzzmachines.com/](http://www.buzzmachines.com/)

------
aclissold
A fun alternative is to build everything yourself for free, from scratch, as
an app! Shameless plug: [1]

Some resources for getting started down this path: [2] [3] [4]

If anybody wants to chat about audio synthesis on iOS, feel free to get in
touch :)

[1] [https://github.com/aclissold/twyst](https://github.com/aclissold/twyst)

[2] [http://jackschaedler.github.io/circles-sines-
signals/](http://jackschaedler.github.io/circles-sines-signals/)

[3]
[http://mkonrad.net/projects/ios_audio_synth.html](http://mkonrad.net/projects/ios_audio_synth.html)

[4]
[https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/documentation/MusicA...](https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/documentation/MusicAudio/Conceptual/CoreAudioOverview/Introduction/Introduction.html)

~~~
melloclello
Wow, it's crazy to see just how little CoreAudio code you actually need to get
up and running - I was always intimidated by this and have always resorted to
frameworks (first TheAmazingAudioEngine [1], now AudioKit [2]) in the past.

Has it been easy working this way?

[1] [http://theamazingaudioengine.com/](http://theamazingaudioengine.com/)

[2] [http://audiokit.io/](http://audiokit.io/)

------
ChuckMcM
Nice, I've got an Arrick 22 slot modular synth[1] which I keep thinking I'll
expand to a 33 slot unit so that I can add his sequencer too it. I've always
enjoyed reaching in and tweaking the sound mid-pipeline which seemed hard to
do on the Korg M1.

[1] [http://www.synthesizers.com](http://www.synthesizers.com)

------
kragen
This is pretty cool for rich people, for whom buying half a dozen US$300
synthesizer modules is no big deal — the kind of people who buy new mechanical
Rolex watches every year; but it seems to me like anyone with an income under
US$1M/year might be better served with SuperCollider or Pure Data (free)
running on a netbook (US$300) and maybe a MIDI keyboard (like the Keystation
49, US$100) and a MIDI or USB knob box (like the nanoKONTROL2, US$60).

SuperCollider and Pure Data already come with an awful lot of the modules you
can buy as analog hardware. You don't have to buy them. You can just use them.

Now, if we were talking about an electric guitar or something, this comment
would be sort of out of order. But the whole point of modular synths is that
you want to spend time fiddling around and plugging parts together. If you
want to do that, come to the software side. We have _WAY BETTER PARTS_ to plug
together. You can make them sound like _anything_ , including analog synth
modules. _And_ you can get inspired by how _other people_ plugged them
together because you can upload your patches to web sites. It's nothing less
than a vastly improved substitute to analog modular synths.

Back in the 1970s, computers were too slow to do much in software. Even the
famous Deep Note, from the 1980s, used hardware oscillators under computer
control (although it's a fantastic example of the expressive power software
gives you). A PC in the 1970s might be able to manage 300,000 instructions per
second, and maybe 10,000 floating-point operations. Now you can do literally
_ten billion_ floating-point operations per second on an off-the-shelf CPU, a
_million_ times faster, or eight _trillion_ on an off-the-shelf GPU, almost a
_billion_ times faster. This brings a lot of amazing stuff into reach that
wasn't before, including even things like RF modulation and demodulation.

RF downconversion, though, still takes analog electronics. Computers still
aren't fast enough.

I've done some work with Diego Alberti on real-time music synthesis on a
microcontroller. Because the real-time audio synthesis wasn't taxing enough
for the CPU, we decided to generate a composite video signal in software
visualizing the waveform, too:
[https://github.com/kragen/ar_bytebeat](https://github.com/kragen/ar_bytebeat)

He carried this work forward, and it is currently on exhibit at the +CODE
exhibit at the Centro Cultural General San Martín until the end of this week,
if you're in Buenos Aires.

With that kind of thing, hopefully you won't have to spend US$300 on a netbook
to experiment with software synthesis. Check out jarmitage's comment at
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10540209](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10540209),
which mentions running Pure Data patches on a computer embedded in a guitar
pedal!

~~~
joshontheweb
For me, a really important part of the process is the tangibility. I'm not a
analog purist but I do find that one knob per function and no menu diving
works much better for me creatively. Unfortunately most digital/software
synths cant resist the temptation to cram everything into menus.

As for the price. Modular isn't cheap but you hardly need to be a millionaire.
You can get a fully functional starting setup for $500 and add from there as
you can afford it.

~~~
darkmighty
Isn't it possible to just buy a set of knobs/buttons/etc and use that to
control the software?

~~~
TheOtherHobbes
Not easily. The big problem - the one that has never been solved - is that
software needs a programmable interface with fixed hardware
controllers/knobs/sliders, but dynamic labelling. You can certainly imagine
using modern controller and display technology to build such a thing - studio
mixers have had similar features for years - but the price is always going to
be prohibitive.

And there's no standard display API for softsynths. (NI have tried to produce
one called NKS, but it's early days.)

And softsynths can have hundreds of parameters. Showing them all at once is
always going to be a challenge. So most controller products either show
nothing at all, or show a handle of items - like eight or so. Which are
different for every synth.

If a softsynth supports OSC you can fake the tactility on an iPad, but the
small size is a problem; I expect the Pro will be better, but still limited.

Music certainly works better when it's tactile, but - as someone who used to
design and build modular hardware, occasionally for cash - I now find modulars
rather ridiculous, and certainly just as limiting in their own ways as any
other technology.

They make great toys, but IMO the _spirit_ of modulars - build completely new
things to make new music - is a lot more alive in software than hardware now.

~~~
kragen
I feel like it isn't that hard to hook something like the BCR2000 or
nanoKONTROL2 up to Pd, and then you can make labels for the knobs using paper
stickers and a pen. Then you get to choose which few dozen parameters you want
to have at your fingertips. And then you get a lot more tactility than an
iPad. I also know a guy who drove his synth from a Wacom tablet, giving him X,
Y, and pressure axes with low-latency, high-precision control, but no haptic
feedback like the BCR2000 gives you.

~~~
TheOtherHobbes
That's fine when you have a single patch/synth, but most projects have
anywhere between a handful and tens of different synths.

Novation have made automap systems for about ten years now. NI have made them
for a couple of years.

But aside from touch panel toys like the iPad and the Lemur, and some high-end
mixers, I still haven't seen a system with more than eight knobs/digital
labels.

It wouldn't be hard to design one. Unfortunately in a market where $200 is a
lot for a controller, it's hard to make a project like that profitable.

------
dejv
Take a look on Bast Instrument: [http://www.bastl-
instruments.com/](http://www.bastl-instruments.com/)

Their stuff looks interesting and you can even buy DIY kits. They even have
modules for servo motors, solenoids and other stuff that you can interact with
real world.

They are also my office neighbours.

------
Isamu
More please! I have just been introducing my daughter to the old-school Moog
synths. Some of these new modules are pretty crazy, all analog or
digital/analog hybrids, doing everything the designers can think of to cram
into a module. Pretty inspiring for tinkerers.

~~~
onre
[http://wiard.com/](http://wiard.com/)

They have some pretty far-out stuff. Woggle Bug and Waveform City are
outstandingly weird in a very creative way.

------
koof
The fact that music.razerzone.com exists means there is little hope for
democratized electronic music-making being anything but a male money dump,
much like video games. Razer will probably start making bike computers next.

~~~
chillingeffect
Not sure what you're on about... but women spend the same or more on video
games depending on the market as men [ 1 ] [ 2 ] [ 3 ]. There are so many free
apps for making electronic music now, as well as tutorials, kits, schematics,
discussion lists, workshops, vids on yt, it's out of control.

[ 1 ] [http://www.themarysue.com/women-gamers-spend-equal-on-
games/](http://www.themarysue.com/women-gamers-spend-equal-on-games/)

[ 2 ]
[http://psychology.wichita.edu/surl/usabilitynews/141/videoga...](http://psychology.wichita.edu/surl/usabilitynews/141/videogames.asp)

[ 3 ] [http://www.businessinsider.com/women-and-mobile-
games-2014-8](http://www.businessinsider.com/women-and-mobile-games-2014-8)

