The Official Sequential/Oberheim Forum
MODULAR => Dave Smith Modular => Topic started by: chysn on March 04, 2016, 04:25:20 AM
-
DSM01: August 2014
DSM02: January 2015
Is Dave Smith Modular still a thing, or what?
It would be great to see enough DSM modules to build a complete Eurorack synth. Oscillator, LFO, EG, sequencer, the Pro-2 style state-variable filter.
-
DSM is still a thing, it just takes a backseat to stuff that turns a profit. Keep your eyes open though, you haven't seen the last of it.
-
Bonus points for making a modulation/preset manager based on the Pro 2 voice or something even better than that. Would save a lot of rattletronics modules and permit preset storage for those that want that.
While I would love to see DSI offer it all the real power of the eurorack scene is making it possible to pick the best modules from each manufacturer. For instance how about Boomstar analog oscillators, Modal Electronics 002 digital oscillators, Tom Oberheim SEM filter and Mutable Instruments Clouds as a starter?
-
Bonus points for making a modulation/preset manager based on the Pro 2 voice or something even better than that. Would save a lot of rattletronics modules and permit preset storage for those that want that.
How would that even work? Everything has its own knobs, that don't necessarily even transmit anything. I guess it could be like a patchbay with a bunch of ins and outs that takes a snapshot of voltages going from each in to each out. But that's like the antithesis of the whole thing.
-
Preset storage is effectively a very slow analog sequencer....
-
DSM03 is next: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6LkkxWffpI&feature=youtu.be (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6LkkxWffpI&feature=youtu.be)
-
Hey, that's a cool thing to be the bleep next!
-
Well, I at least like the cabinet.
-
Well, I at least like the cabinet.
While I'm extremely interested in the module itself, I'm also curious about the little cabinet! I'd love to make a little modular effects box-- it'd be great for my Rhodes.
-
I figured it was a custom case, because you couldn't get much of a synth into a 38- or 40hp case. Pittsburgh Modular makes a 48hp case, Moog makes a 60hp. Those are both on the small side of what's (easily) available.
-
I figured it was a custom case, because you couldn't get much of a synth into a 38- or 40hp case. Pittsburgh Modular makes a 48hp case, Moog makes a 60hp. Those are both on the small side of what's (easily) available.
I found this, for something really small (32hp). I think it's too small for what I want to do, but it's certainly cute.
http://www.analoguehaven.com/doepfer/minicase/
-
I figured it was a custom case, because you couldn't get much of a synth into a 38- or 40hp case. Pittsburgh Modular makes a 48hp case, Moog makes a 60hp. Those are both on the small side of what's (easily) available.
I found this, for something really small (32hp). I think it's too small for what I want to do, but it's certainly cute.
http://www.analoguehaven.com/doepfer/minicase/
Thanks for the link! I had been aware of it and considered it for a while but have since forgotten about it.
Knowing a little more about modular than I used to, I can now say with confidence that I would not buy that for a couple of reasons.
First of all, it's a little bit too small-- I think for effects box purposes I'd want a VCA (probably dual), a buffered multiple, an LFO, a delay (for chorus effects as well), an envelope follower, a ring mod, a filter, a mixer, and perhaps some kind of wave shaper/bit crusher/distortion (I'd most likely go with the DSM-02). Even with the smallest of all those modules, I'm not sure it'd fit in that tiny box! I think it'd probably fit in that custom DSI case though :). Of course there's probably a nice, compact, and logical solution to the buffered multiple, VCA, Mixer/Output module conundrum.
Secondly, and more importantly, I wouldn't buy that Doepfer case because of the sliding nuts. I tend to swap modules around often, and I suspect that would be happening a lot with a case used for effects. I actually bought a Pittsburgh Modular Cell 90 which has sliding nuts (no longer in production apparently...) and ran into what I consider serious issues as far as cases go-- one being that there weren't enough nuts provided and the other being that the nuts do not work with all screws. The latter may be a problem unique to PM, but I'm not willing to take another chance. At the end of the day, swapping modules out shouldn't take more than an hour, a headache, and sore hands. Another problem I had, although it is my own fault for not doing more research, is the fact that it is essentially a skiff, which prevents a lot of cool modules from fitting, including the Doepfer BBD's and VCLFO.
I hope that if DSI are considering putting together an 'effects' case of modules they take those kinds of points into serious consideration.
-
Yikes! The Moog 60HP case has sliding nuts, as well. I looks like it should be pretty easy to add more nuts, and I'd just need some M3 nuts and screws. I'm not looking forward to lining the things up, though. I am looking forward to having lined the things up. Once I have it set up, I expect it to pretty much stay in place.
-
Secondly, and more importantly, I wouldn't buy that Doepfer case because of the sliding nuts. I tend to swap modules around often, and I suspect that would be happening a lot with a case used for effects. I actually bought a Pittsburgh Modular Cell 90 which has sliding nuts (no longer in production apparently...) and ran into what I consider serious issues as far as cases go-- one being that there weren't enough nuts provided and the other being that the nuts do not work with all screws.
My experience with the Moog skiff case is that its sliding nuts are really easy to deal with. First off, they give you plenty: 15 pairs on the 60hp case. Since most modules use two screws, that's pretty generous, and extras can be removed by taking off one of the ends.
Second, they give you more than enough screws to use all these nuts. So that's nice.
Third, the nuts do a good job of staying where you want them. They're square, and just the right size for the inside of the rail. I even removed a module from between two modules, to take out a jumper, and had no problems getting it back in.
-
My experience with the Moog skiff case is that its sliding nuts are really easy to deal with. First off, they give you plenty: 15 pairs on the 60hp case. Since most modules use two screws, that's pretty generous, and extras can be removed by taking off one of the ends.
Second, they give you more than enough screws to use all these nuts. So that's nice.
Third, the nuts do a good job of staying where you want them. They're square, and just the right size for the inside of the rail. I even removed a module from between two modules, to take out a jumper, and had no problems getting it back in.
Thanks for the info. I'm happy to hear that sliding nuts are working out for you! I'm starting to rethink my stance on them now. Perhaps the problems I've had are unique to PM's cases. I really hope so because sliding nuts do offer a bit of extra freedom. I'm a fan of TipTop's Z-Rails, but there's always a bit of space in between a couple of my modules. Luckily my obsession with modular is greater than my obsession with making sure things are lined up! It still grates a little bit though.
-
Steven, are you on Modular Grid? I'd love to see your euro-rig.
-
Steven, are you on Modular Grid? I'd love to see your euro-rig.
I have been on there-- but to be honest I try to avoid it because I get to thinking about my rig too much rather than just working on music! Besides, having invested in so much music gear at this point, it's important to try to earn back some of my investment every now and then!
With that said, this is the second time Modular Grid has come up recently, and doing what I do on YouTube it probably makes sense to post screens of the setups I use in the descriptions and what-not :).
Here is my main rack:
(https://cdn.modulargrid.net/img/racks/modulargrid_308109.jpg)
Here is my 'clocking' rack:
(https://cdn.modulargrid.net/img/racks/modulargrid_308113.jpg)
As you can see my main rack is full, so I'll have to plan out how to accommodate for whichever delay/KS module I inevitably pick up!
-
Thanks!
How do you like the Dixie II? Part of my long-term plan is replacing my Doepfers with Dixies. I have no particular complaint with the Doepfers, but I like the idea of a triangle core and love the idea of 6HP.
(https://cdn.modulargrid.net/img/racks/modulargrid_305195.jpg)
This is mostly complete, minus a few of the things pictured (one more Triatt, the VCA, the EG, the low pass gate, and obviously the DSM03).
I bought the Octone with part of my Mother-32 proceeds, and it should be here today. I considered the same Pittsburgh Modular sequencer that you have, but the Octone's scale quantization, built-in clock, and per-step gate outs were too much to resist.
The inevitable third 60HP rack will make space for a third oscillator and a MIDI module, and on and on and on.
-
By the way, how do you get pitch CV to your oscillators? That passive multiple on the left of my rack is mostly for distributing CV to each oscillator. I tried a buffered multiple, and the tracking was ridiculously awful. With the passive multiple, everything stays locked in tune with the Little Phatty for five octaves.
-
There must be something wrong with your buffered multiple as that is how you should be distributing pitch.
A passive multiple will alter itself depending on its outputs, there is a series voltage drop so you are not going to be getting 1V/octave coming out of all of the outputs. This voltage drop increases with each output attached.
A buffered multiple should avoid this problem as the voltage is maintained across all outputs.
What buffered multiple are you using?
-
There must be something wrong with your buffered multiple as that is how you should be distributing pitch * * * What buffered multiple are you using?
It was the buffered multiple in the Mother-32*. But just about everyone on MuffWiggler says to use passive mults anyway, as buffered mults tend to overcompensate. This seemed counter-intuitive to me, but so far my experience is bearing it out.
A passive multiple will alter itself depending on its outputs, there is a series voltage drop so you are not going to be getting 1V/octave coming out of all of the outputs. This voltage drop increases with each output attached.
That was my concern about adding a third oscillator. With two oscillators on the Intellijel Passive Multiple, there's no voltage drop (at least not detectable within .001V by my meter) and tracking is lovely for five octaves.
* Yeah, I was surprised that the Mother-32's mult is buffered, but it is.
-
I'm surprised they say to use passive ones on MW, that goes against everything I have ever heard!
-
I had a quick look on MW, most people seem to think you should use buffered ones for pitch cv.
There's a good post by Tony Steventon in this thread that explains it better than I could!
https://www.muffwiggler.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=65129
I have had problems with passive ones for pitch so I always use active ones myself.
-
I did read the thread you linked, and it's why I tried the buffered multiple first. And then
https://www.muffwiggler.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=138460&sid=94b17b202cb04ed18d26f4941a35ff19
https://www.muffwiggler.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=31032&sid=872c732a4758c1487fea20f81e35fadb
There's quite a bit of nuance to it, even in the thread you linked. I'm more than willing to entertain the idea that the Mother-32's buffered multiple is just not very good, or that there was a poor impedance match or something; at the same time, I can't imagine that the folks saying that tracking will be affected with two oscillators and a passive mult have actually tried it, much less measured it with a meter like I have.
Obviously I'll revisit the issue if I move to a third oscillator and things go sideways. For now, my advice would be, start with the cheaper thing and see if it works for you. For you, it didn't work, but it was probably still a good idea to try the passives out.
-
I think if you are only using 2 OSCs then a passive will be fine, I notice that on my modular if I attach a pitch cv via passive to 4 or more (OSCs or filters) it all starts to go pretty wonky.
-
I think if you are only using 2 OSCs then a passive will be fine, I notice that on my modular if I attach a pitch cv via passive to 4 or more (OSCs or filters) it all starts to go pretty wonky.
What do you have that works well? As soon as the DSM03 comes out, I'm going to be tracking three things at 1v/oct.
-
http://www.doepfer.de/a1852.htm, gives you multi buffered outs for pitch CV control AND allows you to mix in a mod source or two.
-
Oh, that looks nice! And it doesn't cost much more than a regular 2HP buffered multiple.
-
There's the A-180-3 as well, cheaper but more basic. Can do 1->6 as well as 2->3.
-
That looks like a more conventional small-HP buffered multiple, whereas for the A-185-2 they promise that it's a precision buffer with "exactly" a 1.00 amplification. No hit-or-miss with that one. The question is whether this promise of precision is worth the HP (it's certainly worth the money), or if other 2HP buffered multiples are up to the task.
-
I got the Mutable Instruments Links. It works great as a buffered multiple for oscillators, delivering on its promise of low offset error. But also, it has a 2x2 unity mixer, which I use for keyboard transposition of the sequencer. Links is a good thing.