Hi, I’m a newbie to all things vcv.
Where can I go to ask my stupid beginner questions?
Thanksomuch.
Welcome… You are in the right place! Go ahead and ask questions… no need to ask permission first.
Welcome to, ask away. There’s this if you find it helpful:
@Omri_Cohen has made many very informative and hands on videos and tutorials. Including step-by-step patch-from-scratch videos with all the neccessary explanations. Target audience ranging from absolute beginner to pretty advanced.
Check out his Youtube channel:
Greetings, patient tutors,
I’m working now to get a handle on the subtle yet significant distinctions between Trigger and Gate signals.
In the process, I started exploring the Q173 Gate Maths module and encountered an unexpected outcome that exposes a murky area of my understanding.
I had hoped to set up an experiment patch where 4 different Env/VCA/Oscillator sets could get into a polyrhythmic conversation owing to the patterns in which their envelopes would be controlled by each of the 4 outputs of the Q173.
There’s lots to learn about and love in the Q173, but I’m curious to find out why its 4 outputs, connected to an ADSR EG’s Gate input, do not appear to cause ADSR EG to respond robustly enough to give a VCA controlled by the envelope much oomph at all.
In that scenario, the VCA delivers very low output when the envelope engages the amp – even when I just about max out the settings on the ADSR the connected VCV.
Visual determinations can be deceiving, but only the release stage of the ADSR appears to respond when a signal from the Q173 hits it.
The behavior makes an interesting comparison to what I observe when I connect one of the Q173 outs directly to an oscillator – in that scenario, generally speaking “i get plenty” (particularly in the Q173’s “Simple” mode).
EDIT PS: Realizing that not all oscillators have gate inputs, and that there’s a difference between connecting outs from the maths module to a gate input (when there is one) and the V/Oct input!
I am forming the impression that the 5 volts of output delivered by the Q173 in its gating role are not applied in the same way as 5 volts applied to a typical V/Oct scenario. Yet the thought nags at me that it’s SUPPOSED to behave the way I assumed it would (which likely compounds my folly).
I had reckoned the ADSR EG would respond as it does when I connect other gate / clock type sources to it – which is to say that the envelope behaves as configured, and the VCA it’s controlling “opens all the way (when the envelope tells it to open)."
So… I’m doing something… well, maybe not wrong per se (kinda why I am digging the whole modular galaxy) – but not in the way that derived the expected outcome.
Clearly, I’m shy a few details on how gates and maths interact with each other, and other modules (likely owing to gaps in my “basic concepts” understanding).
It has to do with Triggers and Gates the output of Q173 is (mostly) triggers.
I have attached a patch where I changed the Triggers to a Gate. Just study it
The ADSR will only sustain(S) when the Gate is high.
here is the patch
Trigger Gate Q173 otalgia-2000 26072026.vcv (2.8 KB)
Change the Audio module to your audio needs.
This is the important part
thank you, @Yeager – hugely appreciated! i think my confusion started right at the beginning – the module is named Q173 Gate Math. should i understand that it generates triggers FOR gating, not its own gates? i will dive into your patch later today – it will solve my confusion for sure.
I think it’s a confusing module, so much so that I connected the clock to the cv in of the configuration in stead of the clock in (you have to change that in the patch or download the one below). I often use a scope to an output to see why something is not working.
Trigger Gate Q173 otalgia-2000 26072026.vcv (2.8 KB)
BTW it did generate some gates, but only on simple and binary.
OK – i think i understand what your patch illustrates.
the top row duplicates what i had been doing, with the left scope displaying the output of the Q173 directly, and the right showing how ADSR EG responds to that output (as described, not terribly robust).
the bottom row explains how to utilize the Q173 output to create proper gate values. IF (…and it’s a big “if”) i understand your patch, the Merge module leverages its polyphonic capability to handle the four Q173 output channels, passing these to the Gate module to create gate values from them. I guess the Gate module is polyphonic too? because all four channels are passed to the split “intact” after the gating is applied. the Split module allows each gate signal to pass to a scope channel so that i can see how the different gate patterns behave, and also see how ADSR EG responds to the signal from GATE.
further, i think i’m also learning that it would not be necessary to use four individual Gate modules to create this result for myself – because polyphony allows Gate to track and process more than one signal at a time. but, i need to use Split after that in order to make use of more than one processed signal.
do i have the sense of it?
again, huge thanks!
Your patch illustrated the usefulness of the scope perfectly. I have been confused by some of the scope adjustments and sort of avoided it before now!
It does have lots going on, and it offers quite a range of options in a small space. I think a situation like that often lends to the complexity but if one can master an understanding, it can kick out quite a range of stuff!
I noticed this also – in Simple mode I was able to get easy results (simple!) but wanted to explore more into the Random area, at which point – because I wasn’t generating true gate values, I think – I started getting little or nothing at all.
I have been deep into this since getting your patch and have a great deal of better understanding. I saw as well, by the way, the interesting difference between the Merge / Split module combination and Grande’s more compact MS4 module, so thanks for that too!
I didn’t know if you would have installed the Grande module so I went the VCV way 
Indeed! And I’m finding that interesting patterns can be generated with the Q173 when you dip into its programming feature.
Remember that holding down “control” on your keyboard while going through the right-click menu will keep the menu open while clicking.
wow, i never knew that. super-useful, thank you!
New Noob Question! “Adding velocity control to oscillators that don’t have dedicated CV for that”
I’m setting up a patch to interact with a MIDI keyboard controller. I have the essential parameters configured, but not all oscillators have a native AMP or LEVEL (or VELOCITY) CV input, and I’m trying to figure out if a workaround might be possible.
What I have tried:
Patching MIDI > CV “Vel” to a VCA’s CV input - doesn’t quite work in a completely satisfactory way, but I also have ADSR EG running into that port and perhaps the EG works against my purpose.
Patching MIDI > CV “Vel” to ADSR EG “SUS” or “ATT” CV’s
- also doesn’t really provide the most resounding effect either, although some finesse may be observed with the former. In this case I am still trying to determine if one wants to adjust the CV pot for the chosen stage fully counter-clockwise – it appears that you get better low-velocity sensitivity that way, but there might be a trade off in maximum output derived.
I’m also leaving myself open to the possibility that if a dedicated volume CV wasn’t a feature of the oscillator then… maybe ya just don’t get that, and one deals with the osc on its own terms as designed.
But if anyone has a pro tip, I’m all eyes.
The way I had it configured didn’t achieve full dynamic range – only the partial desired effect was derived.
But in your illustration, the sequence of modules is different than the way I configured mine and I’m going back now to give your layout a shot.
Thanks so much!
Ahh, yes – your helpeful and generous illustration revealed that indeed, I was patching more than one thing in a “sub-optimal manner!”
In addition, the MIDI controller I’m using a very small, portable one and thus hardly the most nuanced of manuals. It is velocity sensitive, but the tolerances are very tight and big variations are triggered by very small changes in pressure.
Thanks again!
I’m getting good outcomes now, but I was looking at RSCL earlier in fact while thinking, now how could I do this…
I haven’t used RSCL before but I was considering it. I’ve been learning that sometimes, outcomes with different (what I’d call) “modifier modules” often exhibit an attenuation result more than amplification. So I thought that perhaps with RSCL, the maximum value might be similar to what we’d call “0 dB” or “unity gain” on an old-fashioned board.
But if it can increase level then that’s super-useful, of course with the range more precisely defined by MAX & MIN. (I guess that’s what it’s big ol’ “GAIN” knob does? 
Sometimes, one really does simply need to just try things!)