VCV Rack – Open-source virtual modular synthesizer

Your comment on skeuomorphism no sense. All of the modules shown there are replicas of real hardware ??

> I don't see how to use it as a VST, though I see VST mentioned in the docs as a thing that will be implemented as a plugin, so I guess it's on the radar.

Correct. For the time being, it is possible to do some audio/midi routing to make it work in a DAW using 3rd-party utilities. (Easier on a Mac which already comes with the ability to create virtual MIDI devices, and composite audio devices.) From there you can set it up as an "external" instrument in most DAWs.

I managed to crash it on macOS by having a second audio interface. After that, there was no output signal anymore (even after I deleted the second). I was about to give up, but impressed that the project I made was saved pretty much till the state before I added the second interface.

Do you know if its possible to get instruments like TB-303 and TB-808? Does anyone know a multi-platform MIDI keyboard to accompany this synth?

A little easier on the pocketbook vs. Eurocrack :)

See https://vcvrack.com/manual/Core.html for VCV Bridge information.

For now you can use inter-app MIDI and audio to use it as an external instrument in most DAWs.

I use it with RogueAmoeba's LoopBack (like SoundFlower, but less glitchy and way more flexible), and feed that into a composite audio device in the Mac's Audio MIDI Setup app. That gives me a stereo pair for assignment in Ableton's external instrument.

This is really not that cumbersome to setup. Once you setup the inter-app config, you never have to change it. I created an External Instrument preset in Ableton with the corresponding MIDI out and Audio in, so it's really just a two-step process to use it: Launch VCV Rack, and load the External Instrument preset.

Here's a tutorial and template project for creating your own plugins. https://github.com/VCVRack/Tutorial The other resource is the collection of header files in Rack/include/.

Yes, documentation is needed, so I'm collaborating with a few people to get everything documented.

You can hold Ctrl while clicking-and-dragging on an output to create a stackable cable on top of it, or drag from an input to the output, whichever you prefer.

For an in-depth guide to basic synth components, check these out:

http://sonicbloom.net/en/63-in-depth-synthesis-tutorials-by-...

Turn it down with a mixer module then?

Yes, IMO. Modular is advanced, but it's the purest, most fundamental way of synthesizing sound. Many people complain that they never see modular artists make normal subtractive patches (the typical VCO > VCF > VCA, modulated with ADSR envelope generators), but the truth is that you can make subtractive patches all day with modulars if you want, but they only comprise about 0.0001% of the sonic design space, so poeple usually explore other patches instead. So yes, you can use the modular format to learn synthesis and build easy or hard patches all alike. VCV Rack simulates at a voltage level, so you can "debug" patches with the Fundamental Scope if you're confused about exactly what a signal (CV or audio) is really doing.

I would say modular can be more simple than a lot plenty of beginner-focused all-in-one subtractive synthesizers.

At its most simple, synthesis is no more that changing the pitch and amplitude over time. Not having delved into this example so unable to tell for sure; that set of features will already be covered by a single sound generation module, capable all sorts of wails, warbles and glissando- think of a theremin.

Now you can go many paths onwards from there, start with a complex sound and use a filtering module to shape the sound over time (subtractive synthesis) Or modulate the original signal and move into the world of AM or FM synthesis. All by just adding another single module.

I think simplicity or complexity with modular synths all lies in the hand of the user and I would certainly advise anyone to delve in.

The most popular "how to synthesize" article series is Synth Secrets which ran in Sound on Sound Magazine over a period of years. You can find those online.

Regarding what tool to use, a modular like this(albeit in physical, analog form) is the "original" way to do it. Modular sound can do just about anything provided you have the modules and will to program it. Later on in the commercialization of synthesis manufacturers built smaller semi-modular or fixed-path synthesizers which don't let you patch anything anywhere but are considerably simpler to achieve a result with since their basic architectures expose all the essentials of sound character without being so much of a programming exercise: the Minimoog and Oberheim SEM, to name two, just sound good out of the box and generally sound good no matter how you turn the knobs, and their designs are widely cloned even today.

This era lasted roughly from the early 70s through the early 80s after which synth programming soon became complicated again, this time by digital technology allowing everything to be tweaked and patched and perfectly recalled from memory, provided you were willing to dive through menus. Synth programming turned into a speciality in this era; everyone who just wanted a sound used the built-in presets.

I think Modular might be better for a beginner if the price were not so prohibitive. A modular is better for understanding how eery piece of your system can or does affect another, because you've manually plugged them together.

I guess it depends on whether you primarily want to "learn synthesis", or "make music with synths". The former, I think modular is worth a look, but for the latter modular is too much money and effort.

I'd compare it to learning C vs Python. I'd recommend computer science students get early exposure to C, but for someone writing simple scripts, jump straight into Python.

I mostly learned synthesis through free youtube tutorials with software synths. A lot of concepts are pretty generic and when learned in one synth can be applied to most others.

Well... It depends. Think about your goals first, and don't worry about cost yet. There is plenty of free or low-cost software options out there that can teach you the basics of either system.

If you would like to just get your head wrapped around the basics of synthesis, it helps to limit what you have to deal with.

With modular, to get a usable sound, you need to have at minimum: a gate/CV source (telling it when notes fire, and at what pitch), a VCO (voltage controlled oscillator), an VCA (voltage controlled amplifier), an envelope (to control the volume of the VCA), and an output (somewhere to send the signal - in this case, the audio-out of your computer.

Then you have to deal with routing the CV signal to the VCO so it knows what pitch to produce, the gate signal to the envelope so it knows when to fire, the CV signal from the envelope to the VCA so it knows when to turn the volume up and down for each note, and audio signal routing.

So it's a big bite to chew just to get started, BUT you learn a lot going this route, and there are a plenty of tutorials out there on modular that take you through it a step-at-a-time, most of which would apply to VCV Rack as well as to real modular equipment. If you start with the basics, tweaking knobs on a non-modular synth will be a piece of cake.

But if you would just like to learn the basics of how the various components work together first, you can start with a simple subtractive software synthesizer, of which there are plenty of free options. Once you get your head wrapped around oscillators, filters, and modulation, you could then dive into modular to gain a more in-depth understanding of what is happening "under the covers."

A lot also depends on what kind of music you would like to produce. If you are into generative music, where you are using devices to produce patterns in interesting and often unexpected ways, go modular, and don't look back. If instead your are mostly interested in driving a synthesizer with a keyboard, IMO, start with a basic subractive synth. Just keep in mind that no pre-packaged synth, no matter how flexible, can rival the sound-design possibilities of modular.

As an answer to "why", if you are curious:

Technical limitations of being a VST/AU plugin: Sparse support of window resizing, lack of multiple simultaneous DAW integration, ability to only exist on multiple channels, ability to output/input its own audio/MIDI, limited number of automation parameters, ability to remain playing without hiccups after a DAW has been closed, future ability to exist on a completely different computer. Compare Rack to something like Reason instead of a single synthesizer, which has no plugin version.

Philosophy of a standalone application: VCV Rack attempts to emulate not only the technicalities of modular synthesizers but the entire mindset and workflow. Most modular artists consider their instrument to be a composition tool rather than an element of a song, which more aligns with the title of a DAW. Eventually the need to use Rack in a DAW will nearly disappear, as more modules are added to compose and record a song from scratch to finish. However, many DAWs have ways of communicating with other DAWs, and Rack is no exception after the release of "VCV Bridge", scheduled to be included in Rack v1.0. More information:

https://vcvrack.com/manual/Core.html https://github.com/VCVRack/Rack/issues/31

I've never seen it take more than 100MB of RAM. What is your OS and amount of RAM reported by your OS?