VCV Fundamental NOIS Range!?

Well this was certainly an eye opener!

NOIS Range

The documentation never specifies an output range. But it is violating the VCV Rack general standard of 10V peak to peak.

The only output that is well behaved is Black.


you are correct, the BGA one, though less noise types, is within spec. Time to raise a bug report with support methinks

1 Like

Yes. I went back and checked Rack version 1, and the situation was/is the same. So this has been a long standing bug.

better late than never :wink: good to have such inquisitive minds about !

1 Like

I can confirm your results also when measured in the scope. Wild and crazy…

Imagine if Andy’s PR had been merged:

Here it is in action courtesy of my modded Fundamental build:


That looks better, but still does not seem correct. I would expect all values to lie between -5 to 5, or 0 to 10, or maybe -10 to 10.

Andy’s change request talks about a fix for different sample rates. But I am not seeing a qualitative difference when changing between 11.025 kHz and 768 kHz, and all rates in between.

There is one exception - the Gray noise seems to be affected by the sample rate. At 11.025 it is +/- ~23, and at 768 it is +/- ~8.

But all the other noise types give basically the same result regardless of sample rate.

Interestingly, Andy’s change request reports that he did not make any fix for Gray because he did not understand the algorithm. So perhaps that fix has been incorporated already.

I think there is more to the story here.

1 Like

correct enough for me, other than that weird value at the bottom.

Yeah, it’s very discouraging that Andrew has transitioned to a completely closed development model, taking no contributions (and hence bugfixes) what so ever.


From further down in the thread linked above:

“We are unfortunately unable to review or accept pull requests to VCV Fundamental due to copyright reasons regarding unlicensed third-party code in VCV Rack Pro.”

Please email any bug reports or feature requests to

Yeah, I know what it says…

@LarsBjerregaard Sorry, wasn’t trying to say you hadn’t read it. Just trying to clarify within the thread. I didn’t even mean to tag you.

1 Like

No worries Paul. My response was mostly to say “and I don’t really buy it”. I think Andrew might have been given some bad advice, or have some misconceptions, and I strongly belive the project would be much better off as an open-contribution project, like it, to a certain degree, was in the beginning. I also note that Andrew has completely withdrawn from his user (and developer) base. None of it good signs in my book.


All I can say is we really appreciate user contribution. We encourage bug reports or feature requests to be sent to where we can process them appropriately.

I don’t doubt your sincerity and kindness Paul. All I can say is that a ticket/issue system and process, like all companies have, is a far cry from an engaged open-contribution, open-source project, and misses most of the advantages of that. Instead of harnessing the massive amount of brainpower, engagement and talent that is still (but not indefinately) present in here, it leads to slowdown, frustration, stagnation, lots of unfixed stuff, lower quality and tons of pointless duplicate work.


I used to log bugs back when VCV used github issues like most. I still do log bugs with modules that use github issues.

This is how it looks in a frequency analyzer:

This is what it sounds like on Youtube :

Haha. That guy wore a lot of good songs. I like his early stuff.