I was thinking that maybe that’s too many knobs? Looking at these hardware controllers I usually think that I’ll run out but with that one I think I’d probably be okay. (72 knobs, in case anyone cares).
My perfect controller would be that with some of the knobs removed, 36 would be more than enough, the rest replaced with endless LED encoders like on the MIDI Fighter Twister and the info screen that you get on the Faderfox EC4 where you can label what each of the controls is pointing at. Maybe a couple of X/Y pads and automated faders wouldn’t hurt too.
I hadn’t noticed they were pots rather than encoders. Still, they seem to do a lot of different controller models.
In the old weekly patch contest a couple of years ago, in Dexter patch week, I played the entire patch on a BCR & BCF with no sequencing. It was an exercise I was glad to have gone through but I wouldn’t want to make it my normal M.O.
YMMV 
2 Likes
Hehe I have templates with the picture of the PC12 I take notes on
1 Like
I think Midilar can finally bridge the gap between digital and analog.
1 Like
As I am considering buying one of these, with this many knobs, you have the luxury to make groups, though. Row 5 column 7 is the third parameter of a module that takes row 5 column 5-8 
Also:
(I’m supercrazily happy with VCV plus a growing collection of control devices. However, I am very sure I’d do much more just aimless, playful experiments with hardware and its blinking lights)
1 Like
I like to take the problem in reverse: for me, having access to VCV has given me time to finally start building my serge system. And as a developer, I can prototype my module ideas (my Stalys Plugin) in VCV before creating them physically in the analog world.
6 Likes
By time, I mean that I can still make music while the project is not finished^^
I’m new to VCV Rack, and I’ve never done modular with hardware, but I feel myself being sucked down this wonderful rabbithole, and enjoying it.
Aren’t there some issues related to aliasing and resolution that are inherent to digital and can never be addressed with a software-only solution? I was playing around with noise generators driving VCOs and filters, inspired by one of Omri Cohen’s tutorials, and amazed and delighted at how tiny tweaks of the knobs could result in completely different sounds. The most interesting ones could be found just at the margins where musicality and chaos meet. Unfortunately, I also found that that’s where I’d get unwanted artifacts like clicks, static and fuzz. Unless you’re using software to directly control “real” analog oscillators, isn’t that sort of thing always going to be a problem in VCV Rack?
1 Like
Just get a role of masking tape.
First, this is not an analog-rulez-digital-droolz post, so please put away the flame throwers. I’m a 100% in-the-box guy, and the only hardware I have is a cheap Korg ROMpler which needs new keyboard rubbers.
I get the feeling that there will always be some synth architectures that are prone to aliasing at doable audio rates, and so the CPU power may always be somewhat of an issue. Sure, if we could run everything at 384KHz and LP filter between each module, we’d not be having the discussion, but given the limits of CPUs and practical software, I think one does not have to try that hard to create patches that misbehave when played at high pitch. I think part of getting good sounds from any digital synth is learning to avoid these things while still finding ways to get to the sounds we want. This of course assumes we always want to avoid those artifacts.
2 Likes
As far as I know, properly designed modules like the VCV Fundamental modules don’t alias at high frequencies. On a spectrum analyzer these are no artifacts visible below 10k, and only a tinny, tinny amount above 10k. Could you back up you claim?
1 Like
But that won’t get you necessarily everything you might want to do. That’s the point. I’m not sure we can recreate everything we have in the library with alias-free equivalents.
Sure you can. You point out yourself that if a module does oversampling with proper filtering you solve it. you said " Sure, if we could run everything at 384KHz and LP filter between each module". I’ll modify that to "the module that needs to can implement its own oversampling to eliminate aliasing.
The original VCV Fundamental VCO-1 used 16X oversampling, although as of 1.0 it switched to using MinBLEP, which is much more efficient for those sorts of wave shapes. Both versions have very little aliasing.
Myself I used MinBLEP in BasicVCO, EV-3, and Substitute, and use oversampling in Functional VCO-1, Kitchen Sink, Saws, Shaper, and Stairway. I can’t say that I picked the best approach for each, but the aliasing is pretty low on all of them.
I mean recreate in a fashion that is practical. VCO-1 has an issue with alias with PWM at high pitch when the pulse is very narrow. That’s not to say it’s bad, but that I have found a way to make it misbehave.
By the bye, I’m not doubting that some people have done very hard work addressing these issues, but you really can’t control how someone’s going to put stuff together, and some assemblages behave pathologically.
Reminds me of this fun bit: Gerry Sussman - We Really Don't Know How to Compute! - YouTube
1 Like
Analog signals, particularly where feedback loops are concerned, are only approximated by digital synthesis. The digital can sound fantastic, and Rack is limited only by your CPU bandwidth. But hardware modular has a different character. Even if individual modules are digital.
I can’t afford to buy a sufficiently powerful eurorack system so I exploit what rack has to offer.
4 Likes
Agree. We’re dealing with discrete time and floating point approximations rather than reals, and feedback implies a sample delay by the length of the chain. And while tossing more CPU at the problems helps a bit, even then we’re running out of room to make silicon any faster; that’s why you get a lot of cores, but they aren’t that much quicker. CPU cycles are like Steinbeck’s money: they come in two quantities: none and not enough. There is audio processing we can’t likely handle in real time. If I’m willing to sacrifice live play, then of course we can make every module sound great. For me, that’s one sacrifice too much.
oh, good catch. I had forgotten about that. My MinBLEP VCOs do that too. I’d call that a bug, rather than a fundamental limit on the practicality of DSP. I still maintain there very few situations where eliminating aliasing is impractical.
Well, I’m deliberately (one might say irresponsibly) shoving things toward a Dirac delta, so one might expect ill behavior. Still, while I think DSP is great, there are cases where things aren’t quite there. Remember how big a deal ZDFs were. Any loop system is going to impose a sample delay similar to non-ZDFs. It’s going to necessarily be an imprecise model of the corresponding analog system.
Let me say I think VCV provides a great visual metaphor for hooking up various bits of DSP, and I’m very glad to have it, but I do think that DSP is a different sort of animal from analog circuitry, and we get the best from it by respecting that difference. As I said earlier: this is not a statement about general superiority; superiority depends on the application.
Let me also say that I’m happy that I can find satisfaction in the box, as I really can’t afford the alternative.
1 Like