Tiptop Audio has a collaboration with Buchla where they're making eurorack versions of most of the classic models. Some would be very good starter modules. https://tiptopaudio.com/buchla/
I own non-modular synths, but I have never owned modular voltage-controlled hardware. However, I have had a lot of fun playing with Bespoke Synth. It has a much lower barrier to entry than VCV Rack imho.
If you are wondering what everyone is talking about in this thread, please check it out:
That's funny because I find VCV much "easier" but perhaps it's because I'm not composing so much as noodling and texture-spelunking.
I do like bespoke and think its great, but it feels a bit janky to me (though it's been like a year since I tried).
It's fun to think about all the various ways people can implement such tools. I'd recommend bespoke for those who want a bit of a different modular system than just a skeuomorphic approach that copies Eurorack design.
Modular synths are very cool, but it's a bit like a swimming pool: it's great when someone close to you deals with the grind so you can just enjoy it.
I talked myself out investing in modulars because I know I'll never have the patience to deal with the wires when all I want is to play. Big respect for those who can do it!
> Pitchfork: What made you decide that either the tracks were done or you were ready finally to put an album out? What was the catalyst?
> RDJ: It's because I finished making a studio in Scotland that I'd been building for about three years. It took so long. I had this engineer helping me wire all the patch bays together, and he was doing it for about three months, every day, and then he realized he was doing it all wrong and had to start again. That was pretty brutal. So it's kind of like, “OK, I've done that now, it's the end of an era.”
> But then I realized I actually like making studios more than making music, because I like the possibilities of what you can do. I make these setups that will achieve some sort of purpose, so the way I've wired it together becomes the track in itself.
For me, the "wires" are the play! I go into VCV rack when the intention-oriented workflows in a DAW like Ableton feel too much "on the rails". The large exploration space of a virtual modular setup is tedious if you're trying to do a straightforward DAW task but wonderful if you are itching to have something unexpected and inspiring thrown at you within the action space of one or two knob or wiring changes.
For around $1200 USD you can put together the “dark easel” of a Make Noise Strega, 0-Coast, 0-Ctrl off Reverb. That plus a little oscilloscope/tuner like the Korg NTS-2 and you’re set.
Yeah. Having a model of the signal flow in your mind and being creative with the structure is half the fun of synthesizers for me. And even if you don't comprehend everything in the moment, happy accidents are a big part of the fun.
Some modular performers like Keith Fullerton Whitman have a very dynamic approach to patching. I've seen shows where he was aggressively re-patching throughout the performance and hot-swapping connections on the fly. I'm talking several patches in a minute. It wasn't subtle, either. It was a nice contrast to many performers who tend to design their system as a fixed structure and then play from there.
The worst thing about them is the lack of patch memories. This is sold as some kind of creative limitation, but really it just means you can't park an interesting patch and keep refining and exploring it.
I prefer virtual modulars like Reaktor and Cherry Modular. Especially Cherry because there's a nice Java dev system which allows custom development with some ready-made UI and I/O options.
This is part of what appeals to me. You can have something you love, but you have an idea that you want to explore. So you have to tear it all down.
I'd usually be drawn to hoarding patches, and organizing them, and labelling and maintaining. With a modular synth, I can only produce in the moment. I find that really freeing.
I'm a hobbyist, and not a professional musician, i might think different if I did this to make money.
Some people have more or less fixed-patch instruments which might be up your alley. Definitely not that type myself (things are always changing and getting swapped in and out), but there are a lot of fun ways to use them.
No shame in that. I find modulars a bit too expansive for my taste. It sounds like you'd benefit from a more traditional hardware synth where the signal flow is mostly locked down.
I have a probably ~$20k modular rack. It's a lot of fun to experiment with, but the fact that you don't have patch save/recall really slashes the utility.
Doing everything in a DAW is the most practical from a "business" standpoint, but it's way less amenable to creative exploration. You really have to know what you want already.
The practical compromise that works best for me is a well-designed hardware realtime synth. You have access to a small fraction of the design space of modular, but a higher fraction of the accessible design space sounds good, and you of course have patch save/recall.
Recently what I've been doing is creating modular patches, driving them with MIDI, and recording the output into my Elektron Tonverk using their on-device multisample recording. You can record samples at a bunch of different pitch/velocity pairs and save them into a multisample file.
Arturia’s V collection includes a Buchla emulation. Personally I find it (the Buchla) impenetrable but YMMV. If you’ve got some MIDI controls lying around already you could have some moderately inexpensive fun.
If you want to stick with hardware, Behringer have a few cheap, fun and effective semimodulars (standalone, no need for rack) like the Neutron and K2. Best Bang for the buck.
P.S. I'll always remember first discovering Suzanne Ciani while watching 321 Contact as a child: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJiTDhOTamo
If you are wondering what everyone is talking about in this thread, please check it out:
https://github.com/BespokeSynth/BespokeSynth
I do like bespoke and think its great, but it feels a bit janky to me (though it's been like a year since I tried).
It's fun to think about all the various ways people can implement such tools. I'd recommend bespoke for those who want a bit of a different modular system than just a skeuomorphic approach that copies Eurorack design.
I talked myself out investing in modulars because I know I'll never have the patience to deal with the wires when all I want is to play. Big respect for those who can do it!
> RDJ: It's because I finished making a studio in Scotland that I'd been building for about three years. It took so long. I had this engineer helping me wire all the patch bays together, and he was doing it for about three months, every day, and then he realized he was doing it all wrong and had to start again. That was pretty brutal. So it's kind of like, “OK, I've done that now, it's the end of an era.”
> But then I realized I actually like making studios more than making music, because I like the possibilities of what you can do. I make these setups that will achieve some sort of purpose, so the way I've wired it together becomes the track in itself.
https://pitchfork.com/features/cover-story/9506-strange-visi...
https://youtu.be/SofDTfm1QKUsi=On2kh85cCa5rgRmA
https://youtu.be/gO9qlVr6-HA?si=FltmhE1xiqPYmKNB
Some modular performers like Keith Fullerton Whitman have a very dynamic approach to patching. I've seen shows where he was aggressively re-patching throughout the performance and hot-swapping connections on the fly. I'm talking several patches in a minute. It wasn't subtle, either. It was a nice contrast to many performers who tend to design their system as a fixed structure and then play from there.
I prefer virtual modulars like Reaktor and Cherry Modular. Especially Cherry because there's a nice Java dev system which allows custom development with some ready-made UI and I/O options.
I'd usually be drawn to hoarding patches, and organizing them, and labelling and maintaining. With a modular synth, I can only produce in the moment. I find that really freeing.
I'm a hobbyist, and not a professional musician, i might think different if I did this to make money.
Doing everything in a DAW is the most practical from a "business" standpoint, but it's way less amenable to creative exploration. You really have to know what you want already.
The practical compromise that works best for me is a well-designed hardware realtime synth. You have access to a small fraction of the design space of modular, but a higher fraction of the accessible design space sounds good, and you of course have patch save/recall.
Recently what I've been doing is creating modular patches, driving them with MIDI, and recording the output into my Elektron Tonverk using their on-device multisample recording. You can record samples at a bunch of different pitch/velocity pairs and save them into a multisample file.