Author |
Message |
mosc
Site Admin
Joined: Jan 31, 2003 Posts: 18197 Location: Durham, NC
Audio files: 212
G2 patch files: 60
|
Posted: Wed Jul 27, 2005 8:00 am Post subject:
|
|
|
These points about the benefits textual interface to Csound and other programs is really the basis of the UNIX programming environment. UNIX programming started off writing little programs like sh, sort, grep, uniq, awk, sed, etc. You can write complicated and powerful applications by piping from one program to another in the shell, or other scripting languages that came along later. This is really modular software. The interface between the programs is text files or pipes. It's a very powerful software paradyme (sp?).
This doens't work too well in a realtime envirnment, unfortunately. _________________ --Howard
my music and other stuff |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Kassen
Janitor
Joined: Jul 06, 2004 Posts: 7678 Location: The Hague, NL
G2 patch files: 3
|
Posted: Wed Jul 27, 2005 8:36 am Post subject:
|
|
|
:¬)
That's where I was getting at. _________________ Kassen |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
DrJustice
Joined: Sep 13, 2004 Posts: 2114 Location: Morokulien
Audio files: 4
|
Posted: Wed Jul 27, 2005 3:43 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
I get you Kassen!
These things, modular programming, chaos and genetic programming etc., are very interesting possibilies. I'm not a stranger to them - it's not new as we know. I imagine that the wider public wants more immediacy, usually through them manipulating knobs and/or GUIs. These can potentially be end results of modular environments on several levels. Exciting stuff indeed. The Clavia modulars, an even patch files, are perhaps examples of such end products?
DJ
-- |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
morbius
Joined: Feb 12, 2006 Posts: 95 Location: Great Smoky Mountains - USA
|
Posted: Sun Feb 12, 2006 2:51 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
To me, by definition of the word "modular", the system must be made up of seperate "modules", each of which has a specific function, or serves a specific purpose... such as a VCA, VCF, VCO, Sample/Hold, sequencer, etc. Just because a synth has patchpoints, does not make it a modular.
Case in point: An ARP-2500 IS a modular... an ARP-2600 is not. A MiniMoog is not, a 3-C, 2-P, Moog 15, etc. are modulars. The 2600 is an "analog". You cannot switch modules or add modules... it is hardwired. A 2600 will always have the same capabilities, and can never be expanded internally. A 2500 can be changed internally. You can add X number of certain modules to the system and change it radically. The DX-7 is a digital synth. The MS-2000 is a digital synth that is "analog modeling"... but that does not make it a modular synth.
So- a modular synth is one where you can change modules around. You could have 4 oscillators, or 14... you can have X number of filters... VCA's... or any other type of module... even from different manufacturers. You can move the modules around. You can group the modules in any configuration you want. Again... you cannot do that with an ARP-2600 or a MiniMoog. They are examples of hardwired, analog synths.
~Morbius~
www.unisynth.com |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
blue hell
Site Admin
Joined: Apr 03, 2004 Posts: 24079 Location: The Netherlands, Enschede
Audio files: 278
G2 patch files: 320
|
Posted: Sun Feb 12, 2006 2:56 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
morbius. _________________ Jan
also .. could someone please turn down the thermostat a bit.
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
ndkent
Joined: Jan 03, 2006 Posts: 66 Location: new york
|
Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2006 7:36 am Post subject:
|
|
|
The word modular has always meant a standardized format that one can construct something more complex out of.
There is a commonly used term for units like the 2600, EMS, MS-20 etc., they are called Semi-Modulars. This implies they do not have fixed architecture, but the modules themselves are physically fixed into the unit.
I'm sure I've played a few word games with people because there are always some units that dodge one's definitions. Serge is a great one because you have a choice of modules built into a single metal panel. You can't interchange them but you have everything else qualifying as a modular synth and can of course build a system with whatever number of anything you can afford. Well you might say, okay call it a semi-modular then. But even that is tricky because many "proper" modulars have combination modules that could have been 2 or more separate but have been combined into a single module for convenience or space savings. So does that make them semi-modular? And Serge has one module (TKB) that's a full panel and the occasional user who bought one module on a big blank panel for whatever reason.
Digital synths fall into another category. You can say you have a software simulation of a Modular Synth or a "Virtual" Modular synth but being software or a modular approach to programming a digital synth, whatever.
The new Buchla modules are a hybrid and they can function with no digital connections but further functionality comes through a digital bus.
There is also a limited form of the above that ranks as a feature on some analog synths. I'm talking about matrix modulation, which is more or less a software controlled bus that allows the kind of modulation possibilities you have with a physical matrix patcher like on the 2500 or EMS. There are always some limitations and the architecture remains more or less fixed.
I've realized that at least v1 of Arturia's Moog Modular seems almost a virtual matrix modulation synth rather than a virtual modular because you have an incredibly elaborate and clever GUI on a set of modules you can't change. Don't know if that's interesting, but things like not being able to insert the EQ, delay, etc into the middle of the path do fall short of the ideal of a virtual modular synth. Still it's an interesting program even if it falls short. |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|