[sdiy] From a commercial standpoint -- has Eurorack "won"?

Tim Ressel timr at circuitabbey.com
Tue May 3 21:19:40 CEST 2016

Good stuff, Jay.

One thing that frustrates me during module design is CV range. First you 
have the LFO/EG dilemma. LFOs tend to be bipolar where EGs tend to be 
unipolar. Then the module under design inherently wants a certain range. 
The best solution is to have attenverters and offset pots on all CV 
inputs. But of course now you have a front panel with 1000 knobs. One 
can get quite gray sorting this out.  Trust me ;-)

On the issue of "crappy graphics", we are talking about artists here. A 
certain amount of 'out there' is expected and tolerated. However it can 
go too far, and has. I have modules labelled in Russian. The only way I 
can use the thing at all is the layout is well done so all the controls 
are obvious. I also have a module that I can never remember how it all 
works because it uses graphics only, no text. And the graphics are not 

And then there was the guy who groused about the font I used. Not 
because it was unreadable, oh no, you can read it just fine. He just 
didn't like it. Bottom line: you can't please everyone, so don't even try.


On 5/3/2016 10:38 AM, Jay Schwichtenberg wrote:
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Synth-diy [mailto:synth-diy-bounces at dropmix.xs4all.nl] On Behalf
> Of Quincas Moreira
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2016 9:46 AM
>>>> To: David G Dixon
>>>> Cc: synthdiy diy
>>>> Subject: Re: [sdiy] From a commercial standpoint -- has Eurorack "won"?
>>>> You can always patch VC control of resonance.  Just send the filter
>>>> output to an inverter, then to a VCA, then back into another filter
>>>> input.  Voila, control the VCA = control filter resonance.  Some cool
>>>> results can be had.  I even did this in a few of the factory presets
>>>> for the new Moog Model 15 app.
> I think this addresses a very good point with the architecture of
> synths/modules.
> One way of building them is to but everything and the kitchen sink into
> modules. Another is to provide minimal or stripped down functionality in
> them but have a bunch of modules that for the lack of a better term are
> utility modules. You can then use the utility modules to build up higher
> level functions much like Quincas has pointed out here. I'm more of a
> utility module person. I think that in the long run it gives you more
> versatility than modules that have more features. More complex modules can
> take up more front panel space and typically you can only use that extra
> functionality in that module.
> Also on the issue of hard to use panels either by crappy graphics or being
> too cramped really surprises me. People just aren't thinking when they do
> some of this stuff. I wonder how many more MakeNoise modules would be sold
> if they wouldn't of been so 'cute' in the panel graphics.
> I look at Serge synths and Serge clones that are being built and have issues
> with them. While there is a lot of good functionality there most of the
> panels just don't have a good 'functional flow' for me. I look at them and
> go if I wanted to do patch X I'd have to run patch cables from the one side
> to the other side of a panel a lot. Seems they could organize the panels
> better for modulation blocks, tone blocks and so on.
> Jay S.
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl
> http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy

--Tim Ressel
Circuit Abbey
timr at circuitabbey.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20160503/8d28e153/attachment.htm>

More information about the Synth-diy mailing list