I think Larry Hendry did a good job answering the 'how' question. As to
the 'why' question, I agree with Paul. The only reason to "normalize"
patches is to achieve some preset configurations. But normal
connections within a full modular goes away from total modularity toward
the direction, ultimately, of a wholly prepatched monosynth. Of course
we want both convenience and flexibility, which often come into conflict
with each other. Hence engineering. Some thoughts:
1) Frequent use of normal patches could get you stuck in habits of using
the synth and you could miss great discoveries that lie before you.
Aways try to find new and interesting patches. It's almost too easy to
make great sound using standard tricks of the trade with 'normal'
patches, whether prewired or just plain patched. To me a modular is
about exploration and discovery and I like to keep pushing at the
frontier. Is normalizing a MIDI output to a VCO 1V/OCT input a handy
shortcut, or is it a slippery slope to conformity? I guess you know my
feelings about it. But then I don't use a keyboard, so I don't need
that shortcut.
2) If you put normal internal connections between modules, I think it's
important to implement this via connectors on the backs of the modules.
That way you can still easily move modules around in the cabinets. And
you can change your mind more easily about where you want the normal
connections to go. I have not done this sort of normal connecting, but
it's the only way I would consider doing it.
3) Normalling can be applied creatively within a single panel design.
Several of the Blacet products feature a panel unit with a main
functional module plus internal supporting modules such as an LFO,
envelope follower or generator. These control sources are normalled
into VC inputs to the main module that can be overridden by an external
patch. Sometimes these control sources are available as outputs, too.
The other end of the design spectrum is the Synthesizers.com approach
where every physical module is limited to its own special function, so
not much can be internally normalled. MOTM seems to lie somewhere in
the middle: take the MOTM-380 as an example of a clever normal
connection scheme with overriding (it has a built-in LFO mixer). When I
design modules and panels, I look for opportunities to separate out
sub-modules and make them available independently by panel jacks and
normal connections between them or by the addition of panel switches for
routing, as on my Mixer-Comparator. I want both convenience and
flexibility, of course. Engineering is name we give to the mode in
which we try to answer this dilemma.
My conclusion is that normal connections are fine, providing they are
easily overridden, don't compromise physical modularity, and don't lead
to habits that ultimately limit the power of the synth.
-Richard Brewster
Sikorsky wrote:
>>to reduce cable clutter, and to improve the patching speed
>>for 'standard' synth sounds, I'm thinking of normalizing
>>some of the most obvious routes using the NC connectors of
>>the jack. I'm thinking of stuff like:
>>
>>
>
>hello all,
>i was thinking along these lines a couple of years ago, but came to the
>following conclusions
>
>1) - i've gone for relatively small cabinets, and i'm addicted to my modular
>which means that modules move around within my collection of cabinets with
>relative frequency
>2) - i'm pretty quick at patching a simple mono-synth, and the task of
>having to re-patch from scratch keep my sounds fresh rather than preset -
>though see note 3
>3) - i've been able to get to a stage where i can leave a mono-synth patched
>up for weeks on end, and work around it for additional sounds i require -
>all i have to do is swap filters
>
>hope that helps..?
>cheers
>paul
>
>
>
>
>