Propellerhead Software

Go Back   Propellerhead Forum > Feature Suggestion Forum

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 2012-12-19, 21:11
bozotoo bozotoo is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 23
C'mawn Props and/or RE developers ...GO MODULAR

(Bouncing off a previous thread: https://www.propellerheads.se/forum/...hlight=modular)

I think this REALLY deserves some serious consideration. There are lots of ideas here for refining the various instruments and components in Reason. Many are good even great ideas ...but c'mawn guys, those are ALL fine tuning. Modular is the next logical GIANT leap for Reason.

The core technologies already exist and are already in use. Capturing the existing elements from other synthesizers (VCOs, LFOs, EGs, VCAs, VCFs, Delay, Mixers, Ring Mods, Waveshapers, Sequencers, etc.) would not be a major challenge. Adding to them with some logic modules (pulse counters, step dividers, etc.) and some creative audio processors and controllers would not be much more difficult.

In particular, I think that Propellerhead should AVOID the Moog type of modular synthesis. The modules are just too basic and limited and the exact same functionality (the typical VCO-VCF-VCA voice) is already overly-redundant in the existing synthesizers (Thor, Subtractor and literally ALL of the RE synthesizers.) Limiting such a giant leap opportunity to just another re-arrangement of what we already have in several instruments would be a waste.

Propellerhead should go beyond the basics and develop a modular system that is closer to the Buchla or Serge designs. Get CREATIVE! Look at the TREMENDOUS variety of fascinating modules available in the Eurorack world. Complex MIDI processors, Wavetable oscilators, pattern generators, VC, multi-stage envelope generators, complex waveform oscilators, multi-spectral filters and all kinds of freaky analog processors abound in that world.

Maybe the Props could open up a kind of Rack Extension for individual modules thus throwing open the doors to all kinds of fascinating stuff for us and new markets for them and RE developers.

JUST DO IT!!

-BH

.
  #2  
Old 2012-12-19, 21:39
selig's Avatar
selig selig is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 10,510
I've got a few friends who develop modules for that world, and there are plenty of modules out there that do some amazing things. I'd also still want the Moog stuff, since that's the modular system I grew up on!

But I have one question - is the current environment developed enough for this to work to your satisfaction? That means a totally mono system, built inside of a Combinator, with all the limitations that implies?

Or do you feel there needs to be a new system in place (maybe a new Combinator, maybe poly CV or MIDI, maybe poly voice exchange)? :-)
__________________
Giles Reaves, aka 'selig'
Audio Illusionist, Musical Technologist
Selig Audio, LLC
USA
  #3  
Old 2012-12-20, 11:07
bozotoo bozotoo is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by selig View Post
I've got a few friends who develop modules for that world, and there are plenty of modules out there that do some amazing things. I'd also still want the Moog stuff, since that's the modular system I grew up on!
Yeah ...but they can only do so much. I don't think the Props could develop more than one modular for Reason and there is virtually nothing you can do with a Moog-style instrument that you cannot already do easily with a couple of Thors and a Combinator. Also there is already a Moog-style modular software synthesizer on the market - Moog V.

Quote:
But I have one question - is the current environment developed enough for this to work to your satisfaction? That means a totally mono system, built inside of a Combinator, with all the limitations that implies?
I don't know all that is "under the hood" in Reason, but it seems to me that all of the core technologies are in place and operating now. Aside from developing some new modules, all of the basic stuff is already up and running. It would be mostly a matter of simply re-arranging the graphic interface. Take the oscillators, filters, sequencer, LFOs, EGs, etc. from the Thor, for example, and simply make their connections available independent of the Thor graphic interface. And give the user the ability to add or remove the particular modules he wants to use. Open up the patch points so that everything becomes available for Voltage Control. Make sure the attenuation for CVs is on the input side of the connection. Then come up with some new modules to rout the CVs and we would have one awe-inspiring modular!

Quote:
Or do you feel there needs to be a new system in place (maybe a new Combinator, maybe poly CV or MIDI, maybe poly voice exchange)? :-)
Yes that would be great. But I don't think it would take a new system. This stuff is already all operational within Reason now. That's why I think it would be the best thing for them to do. It would be a giant leap forward for Reason leveraging systems that are ALREADY up and running. It would be a relatively small development effort that would boot Reason -already the best thing since air- way beyond the stratosphere!

ta

-BH

.

Last edited by bozotoo; 2012-12-20 at 11:12.
  #4  
Old 2012-12-20, 11:28
omshanti20 omshanti20 is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 755
******************

Last edited by omshanti20; 2013-05-11 at 16:26.
  #5  
Old 2012-12-20, 18:54
selig's Avatar
selig selig is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 10,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by bozotoo View Post
Yeah ...but they can only do so much. I don't think the Props could develop more than one modular for Reason and there is virtually nothing you can do with a Moog-style instrument that you cannot already do easily with a couple of Thors and a Combinator. Also there is already a Moog-style modular software synthesizer on the market - Moog V.



I don't know all that is "under the hood" in Reason, but it seems to me that all of the core technologies are in place and operating now. Aside from developing some new modules, all of the basic stuff is already up and running. It would be mostly a matter of simply re-arranging the graphic interface. Take the oscillators, filters, sequencer, LFOs, EGs, etc. from the Thor, for example, and simply make their connections available independent of the Thor graphic interface. And give the user the ability to add or remove the particular modules he wants to use. Open up the patch points so that everything becomes available for Voltage Control. Make sure the attenuation for CVs is on the input side of the connection. Then come up with some new modules to rout the CVs and we would have one awe-inspiring modular!



Yes that would be great. But I don't think it would take a new system. This stuff is already all operational within Reason now. That's why I think it would be the best thing for them to do. It would be a giant leap forward for Reason leveraging systems that are ALREADY up and running. It would be a relatively small development effort that would boot Reason -already the best thing since air- way beyond the stratosphere!

ta

-BH

.
I agree with much of what you're saying, and have recently designed MANY modules myself in case this ever happens.

BTW, there are still Moog modules that aren't available in Reason, from the step sequencer to the filter bank, and there are features not available in Reason devices like having all the waveforms available at once on oscillators/lfos, and having all filter modes available at once on filters. I would like to have ALL types of modules myself, not just the esoteric ones. And I have ideas for some VERY esoteric modules!

But I'm a HUGE fan of the idea, to be certain. I'm just wondering how much support there would be for a mono system, even though it's a like a 'real' modular. :-)
__________________
Giles Reaves, aka 'selig'
Audio Illusionist, Musical Technologist
Selig Audio, LLC
USA
  #6  
Old 2012-12-21, 00:17
nobeahmon's Avatar
nobeahmon nobeahmon is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,381
Quote:
Originally Posted by selig View Post
I agree with much of what you're saying, and have recently designed MANY modules myself in case this ever happens.

BTW, there are still Moog modules that aren't available in Reason, from the step sequencer to the filter bank, and there are features not available in Reason devices like having all the waveforms available at once on oscillators/lfos, and having all filter modes available at once on filters. I would like to have ALL types of modules myself, not just the esoteric ones. And I have ideas for some VERY esoteric modules!

But I'm a HUGE fan of the idea, to be certain. I'm just wondering how much support there would be for a mono system, even though it's a like a 'real' modular. :-)
Build them and we will buy them.
__________________
The more music you make.
The less you worry about RE SDK.
  #7  
Old 2012-12-21, 01:12
selig's Avatar
selig selig is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 10,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by nobeahmon View Post
Build them and we will buy them.
Hey, don't think I haven't given this some serious thought, as this subject is near and dear to my heart. A few weeks back I was visiting a friend who has a nice sized modular system (very nice!), and it got me thinking all over again. Plus I have two friends who build custom modules and one acquaintance who owns one of the larger manufacturers of modular systems, so it's been on my mind quite a bit lately!

I'm coming to the game a bit late, as I have assumed there are plenty of others already working on this concept for Reason. But I may as well do some more research here, and ask more questions about how folks would use modules like this, especially considering the current limitations in Reason (mono CV/audio, Combinator limits, etc).

I've even designed some ancillary modules that could possible deal with some of these issues, but only "on paper" thus far.

So this may be a good thread to collect ideas for who ever decides to follow this path, as there seems to be at least a few folks who are passionate about this subject. :-)
__________________
Giles Reaves, aka 'selig'
Audio Illusionist, Musical Technologist
Selig Audio, LLC
USA
  #8  
Old 2012-12-21, 20:56
bozotoo bozotoo is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 23
Certainly many or even most would like a polyphonic modular system. But if even if a modular was "mono" that would not be a deal killer at all. I used to work for Roland, as the U.S. product specialist for the system 700 and 100M as well as the Microcomposer. I also worked for Serge building modular systems when the "factory" was in Hollywood and for Wavemakers (another defunct modular instrument maker) as they tried to move into the mainstream market. So I definately have my own biases.

But the simple fact is, any good modular is, by definition, "polyphoic" (in the sense of being able to produce more than one note at a time) as well as being polytimbral. A large enough modular can produce multiple different voices (depending on how many VCAs there are to articulate a voice). Its just that you cannot necessarily get polyphonic AND polytimbral out of every voice/module chain. But that is not really the main reason for having a modular system. That kind of thing is MUCH better (and much more easily) done with the pre-patched and semi-modular systems such as the Subtractor and the Thor.

Secondly, there is already a redundancy in polyphonic/keyboard-oriented synthesizers in Reason. That includes the semi-modular Thor which, with its modulation matrix can do most of what any polyphoic modular would do. That box is pretty much already checked. I don't mean to say that a true-polyphonic/true modular is a bad idea -just that the polyphonic (in the conventional keyboard sense) aspect should be secondary and should most certainly not stop someone from developing the modular system to begin with.

What we need in a modular system in Reason is something that takes full advantage of the creative and even whacky voice architecture you can construct with a true modular AND that can be integrated with the rest of Reason. Also, we need something that can go BEYOND the standard piano keyboard and all the limitations that places on us. Granted, most muscicians want a piano style keyboard on their synthesizer. But again, we already have SEVERAL of those. It seems to me that the best aspect of a true modular would be to open up totally NEW possibilities, not just make it more difficult to do the same thing that other instruments can already do.



-BH

.

Last edited by bozotoo; 2012-12-21 at 21:11.
  #9  
Old 2012-12-21, 21:50
selig's Avatar
selig selig is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 10,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by bozotoo View Post
Certainly many or even most would like a polyphonic modular system. But if even if a modular was "mono" that would not be a deal killer at all. I used to work for Roland, as the U.S. product specialist for the system 700 and 100M as well as the Microcomposer. I also worked for Serge building modular systems when the "factory" was in Hollywood and for Wavemakers (another defunct modular instrument maker) as they tried to move into the mainstream market. So I definately have my own biases.

But the simple fact is, any good modular is, by definition, "polyphoic" (in the sense of being able to produce more than one note at a time) as well as being polytimbral. A large enough modular can produce multiple different voices (depending on how many VCAs there are to articulate a voice). Its just that you cannot necessarily get polyphonic AND polytimbral out of every voice/module chain. But that is not really the main reason for having a modular system. That kind of thing is MUCH better (and much more easily) done with the pre-patched and semi-modular systems such as the Subtractor and the Thor.

Secondly, there is already a redundancy in polyphonic/keyboard-oriented synthesizers in Reason. That includes the semi-modular Thor which, with its modulation matrix can do most of what any polyphoic modular would do. That box is pretty much already checked. I don't mean to say that a true-polyphonic/true modular is a bad idea -just that the polyphonic (in the conventional keyboard sense) aspect should be secondary and should most certainly not stop someone from developing the modular system to begin with.

What we need in a modular system in Reason is something that takes full advantage of the creative and even whacky voice architecture you can construct with a true modular AND that can be integrated with the rest of Reason. Also, we need something that can go BEYOND the standard piano keyboard and all the limitations that places on us. Granted, most muscicians want a piano style keyboard on their synthesizer. But again, we already have SEVERAL of those. It seems to me that the best aspect of a true modular would be to open up totally NEW possibilities, not just make it more difficult to do the same thing that other instruments can already do.



-BH

.
+1

Hey, talk to your buddies at Roland and get them to do the system 700 and 100M for REs. I remember literally drooling over those brochures as a kid in High School!

For me I want to see poly CV AND poly voice interconnects in Reason. Then you really could build your own synth. Poly CV is easy since we already have a CV interface - just need to support poly gate really. Poly voice would require a new interconnect protocol/cable IMO. But if those were in place you could literally mix-n-match any part of any synth with any other. Use Samples from NN-XT going through Thor's filters, and modulated by Malstrom's "Mods", with a poly limiter placed after the filters to control resonance. One can dream… :-)
__________________
Giles Reaves, aka 'selig'
Audio Illusionist, Musical Technologist
Selig Audio, LLC
USA
  #10  
Old 2012-12-22, 16:29
bjoeri's Avatar
bjoeri bjoeri is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 36
Thumbs up

I totally see your point about polyphonic CV and voice connections. Would take modularity to a new level IMHO. Have this specific feature been suggested before?

Cheers

Quote:
Originally Posted by selig View Post
+1

For me I want to see poly CV AND poly voice interconnects in Reason. Then you really could build your own synth. Poly CV is easy since we already have a CV interface - just need to support poly gate really. Poly voice would require a new interconnect protocol/cable IMO. But if those were in place you could literally mix-n-match any part of any synth with any other. Use Samples from NN-XT going through Thor's filters, and modulated by Malstrom's "Mods", with a poly limiter placed after the filters to control resonance. One can dream… :-)
 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Props To the Props! Union Phead User Forum (read only) 1 2004-06-27 11:34
P-Heads, thank you for this wunderful refill.. [n/t] eric General Forum (read only) 18 2004-05-28 01:55


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 07:47.