The modular synthesizer, a beast of high power and flexibility, has been an instrument coveted by many and owned by few for years. After the boom of digital and virtual tools, this phoenix seems to have been reborn, thirsty for redemption, almost as if it wanted to reproach what we have lost in the space of thirty years.
Think that at the height of the new-romantic age the modular synth had become synonymous with inconvenience, digital in fact not only avoided a whole series of problems typical of analog instruments but opened the way to a new series of expressive possibilities, unimaginable in ancient times . The ability to store patches in a memory location, without the need to connect and disconnect cables, the ability to emulate acoustic instruments in a more refined way through the sampling technique, the advantages in terms of price for increasingly powerful keyboards and easy to transport, these are just some of the factors that led the modular archaics to a phase of "quiescence". So why rethink modular? What are the needs of a return to origins? Why after about three decades, studded with innovations and technological adventures, do we still find ourselves fascinated by the mammoth of electronics? Is it really worth buying a modular today? .
History of modular units
We are at the turn of the 60s. The Beatles' first vinyl LP is released, Martin Luther King gives his famous speech "I have a dream" and "Transistors" make their appearance in the world of electronics. In such an important historical period, where profound changes vibrated in the air, there could only be a revolution in the musical field as well. It was at that time that two characters, then not very well known to most people, began to develop new concepts related to the generation of sound: Robert Moog e Father Buchla. Robert Moog, who already saw a first success in the early 60s thanks to the publication of an article on Theremin (Fig.1) and the sale of his "kit" for a "do-it-yourself" construction, he developed systems based on transistorized modules, applying the studies of the German designer Harald Bode. These first systems were made in the first half of the 60s and designed with the help of composers Herbert Deutsch and Walter (Wendy) Carlos; it was the success of the album "Switched on Bach", by Carlos, which made the name Moog synonymous with synthesizer, subsequently they were artists of the caliber of Keith Emerson (Fig.2) to Rick Wakeman to strengthen the reputation of the products made by RA Moog Corporation.
Don Buchla, on the other hand, began to develop his systems as methods to "simplify" the creation of concrete music. This type of music, for those in the dark, is a bit like the ancestor of modern electronic music. Natural sounds and noises were recorded on tape, cut, processed, distorted and reassembled, a very long and tedious process. The first result of Don Buchla's efforts was the Series 100, the same "design" of this system was completely dedicated to experimentation; the instruments were equipped with keyboards which were conductive to the touch, and each key was freely tunable. As far as I know, the Buchla (Fig 3) were the first devices to be able to perform a "micro tuning"moreover, unlike the Moog systems, they offered much more complex waveforms than the classic Sine, Square, Saw, Triangle. Both Buchla and Moog provided the musician with the possibility of creating his own sounds, totally new timbres, science fiction, space, in short, it was a new concept of instruments with infinite, or almost infinite, tonal possibilities. Thus it was that a new page in the history of music opened thanks to the contribution of numerous artists, including George Harrison, Klaus Schulze, Tomita, Tangerine Dream, Sun Ra, Stevie Wonder, Vangelis, Giorgio Moroder. It was they who laid the foundations for what would later be called, perhaps with little imagination, "New-age".
Il return (Think Modular)
As announced, in recent years we have witnessed a progressive return to origins. In contrast to the invasion of virtual instruments, there was a sudden and longed-for return on the market of totally analog instruments, including modular systems. Same old school sensations, with jungles of cables, knobs, oscillators to be calibrated and no memories, even if it must be said that these are always products made with modern components. Probably lovers of "Vintage" they will turn up their noses but, trust me, these systems are no less than the giants of the past and many maintain the same expressiveness and sonority, indeed, in some cases it is possible to perceive a few more nuances than the old counterparts. We owe this return to small and medium-sized companies that, over the years, have transformed a simple niche of enthusiasts into a large slice of users, thrilled by the possibility of having instruments with an analog heart, powerful, reliable and versatile. The new "retro-pioneers" bear the name of PAIRS, Synthesis Technology (Also known as MOT extension) to DOEPFER.
PAIA and Synthesis Technology have become "famous" for theirs "Kits", the enthusiast could order ready-made printed circuits, with components to be soldered, and gradually created his small modular system. Although present on the market for many years, the name of Dieter Doepfer came to the fore when he created, with the collaboration of , "Sequencer" analog MAQ16 / 3 (Fig.4); success that was replicated with the creation of a rack monophonic synthesizer, MS-404, which reproduced (even if not officially declared) the timbres of the Roland TB-303 with a few extra steroids; about a hundred units were planned but, to the great surprise, orders were received that exceeded five hundred units in the first two months from the launch of the product.
Then in 1995, Doepfer announced its first series of modular systems: the A-100; an architecture that could count on over eighty modules in "Rack" standard 19 ″, usable with very common 3.5mm jack cables, even in this case the public success was immediate. Excellent names adopted this system in their fleet. Names of the likes of Kraftwerk, Nine Inch Nails and Hans Zimmer. These success stories led to the emergence of new companies, as well as a virus, the modular craze gradually expanded until the turn of the new millennium with the number of manufacturers increasing considerably. Among the most influential names we can find Synthesizers. com (modules almost identical, in form and tone, to the glorious Moog systems and compatible), Analog Systems, Analogue Solutions, Blacet, Livewire and many others.
Modular Systems
In many synthesizers, the signal path is predetermined inside the machine, which in addition to simplifying the customization of the sounds gives the instrument greater compactness and portability. Obviously, as with any "forced" philosophy, the tonal potential of the machine is penalized, especially if it is analog. Modular systems use a different approach, leaving the user full control over the signal flow. This allows for a range of sounds otherwise unattainable with built-in module synthesizers. If we consider that it is possible to modify and expand the architecture at any time, it is evident that the tonal possibilities become almost infinite. Of course at first glance, a nice modular full of cables and knobs (Fig.5) can inspire chaos or terror, but basically it is a simple sense of unjustified bewilderment, a common human attitude towards something that appears foreign to one's experiences. Have you ever played with Lego or Meccano? Same simplicity, logic and versatility. Each module has its own specific function and interacts with the others via cables. Working on a modular is didactically exciting, only in this way does the logic of the synthesis mechanisms become truly "tangible", you will see that once you understand the basic concepts on oscillators, envelopes and filters, it will be much easier and more intuitive to operate on any other synthesizer. Yet many users avoid this type of systems, or worse, do not consider them at all, I often notice it on the forums, just when someone asks for suggestions regarding purely “analog” purchases; the usual advice "Standard" emphasizes this or that instrument “Vintage”, Completely ignoring the existence of modern modular or analog. Like all systems, modular systems also have advantages and shortcomings and it is precisely from these that I would like to start. In "Primis", forget the convenience of "Presets". You will have to deal with knobs and cables, long programming times and notations on paper. Tediousness and bulk are the cross and the delight of a modular. Added to this is the high threshold of the “entry” price, ie the minimum emptying of the portfolio for "hardware" that allows you to play at least one note, certainly a valid reason to desist from such a purchase. On balance it will be natural to ask yourself if it is worth spending that amount for a handful of modules that, on their own, seem not to go beyond what a Roland SH-201 could do much faster, or buy a nice Chinese prepackaged full of lights. with lysergic effect. Yet people who spend high enough to grab the big names of the past exist and, more often than not, do so only as a tribute to the prestige of the brand. At this point I'm wondering, what's the point of spending over € 1.000 for a Roland TB-303? Okay, the 303 has that sound that for many is inimitable but the speech ends irremediably there. Except in the case of the artist who necessarily needs "that" certain stamp for his productions, it is important to consider that with that sum you can buy a "Rack" Doepfer (Fig 6) which has much more potential to offer. Personally, at this moment, I am not used to suggestions or advice on specific brands, it is my intention, with this series of articles, to be a guide to the rediscovery of what started it all, to become the fuse that will rekindle your souls to charm of modular programming, at the same time debunking the myth of the machine "Vintage", perfect, the “rosetta stone” of our dreams. In reality there are already many systems on the market that sound really good, perhaps having only an oscillator and a sub oscillator, but what qualifies a "Synth", regardless of the technical specifications, is the sound texture. My intent will be to put you in a position to choose the hardware, not based on the number of filters, oscillators and type of synthesis, but on the basis of personality and sound texture. As we said, unlike traditional synthesizers, the modular ones are expandable, and each new module exponentially increases the tonal combinations at your disposal. Although the initial price for a modular system may seem high, the addition of new modules makes this approach more economically advantageous over time than buying more synthesizers. I also remind you that, not being forced to follow a predetermined path with modular systems, we can explore new sonic combinations in real time. Very often the modules of different manufacturers are physically and electronically compatible with each other (Fig.7), giving you the option of not being tied to a single manufacturer for your system. Also, considering that almost all analog systems work with "Scaling" di 1V / Oct, you can interconnect different systems with each other to create even more complex tones. Another huge advantage lies in the maintenance of this equipment. It is much easier and cheaper to repair or replace a single module than an entire plate of a canonical synthesizer, users who have a little familiarity with electronics will be able to provide for themselves as, very often, the schematics and components of modern production are readily available. Remember that the modular can become worse than a drug ... it starts with a small system and then slowly grows to monstrous abominations, take a look at this wonderful system Serge from Twelft Root Studio (Fig 8) consisting of 12 Serge panels set in an aluminum structure with futuristic shapes, or this beautiful Modcan system by Drew Neumann (Fig 9) made up of over forty modules. 
If you really want to see the maximum, I suggest you take a look at the WALLS of modular units in Hans Zimmer's studio, just think that only the 100m Roland System he owns measures over 7m divided into various columns. Frightening! But why should we spend so much money on a system today "Vintage" when today's market offers us a great variety of options? Follow us and, maybe, you will find out….
Why an analog modular?
Most modules work with subtractive synthesis, often presenting the same parameters and oscillators found in a digital counterpart; it often happens that while copying the parameters on a digital clone, only some sounds remain convincing, others remain inimitable, with a mystical aura so particular that it is not even remotely able to convey that kind of sensation. But is it a question of suggestion or do analogue instruments, including modular ones, have that inexplicable "magic" that makes them so special and refined? Staying on the modular theme, it must be said that here it is not just about "being analog", as if that were enough "Tout court “To create a great sound. The difference is also given by the layout of the electrical circuit design that characterizes the system with unique timbres. As some components vary, even in the same "design" of the electrical circuit, the tonal result can significantly vary. I'll give you an example with one of the best known filters ever: the Moog Lowpass. This particular filter is also known as the "Transistor Ladder Filter", due to the "ladder" figure formed by the arrangement of "Transistors" represented on the schematics. It is one of the simplest low pass filters to make yet, after trying several, each of them has a different tone. The filter on the Minimoog Model D sounds a certain way, the same filter on the early ARP2600s sounds different, the same phenomenon even when applied to the Doepfer's A-120 module (Fig.10). It is interesting to note not so much the subtle differences present at the opening of the filter, but the behavior of the "Resonance" and the tonal facets produced when this is brought to high values, I am talking about the classic phase of self-oscillation of the filter (Fig.11). The same goes for the oscillators, for the envelopes, each module will have its own behavior and, consequently, its own timbre rendering. Remember, then, that since these are analog circuits, capable of both generating and manipulating sound, the deterioration of the components can interfere with the final result, unlike what happens instead in digital systems where the machine code acts in a domain with predetermined boundaries. , in “secula seculorum”. From here it is understandable why each machine is equipped with a unique timbre, with small character nuances, like a single "individual" among the crowd of many. Working with a modular means having an intense feeling of physical control over the sound. Moving the cables, moving the knobs and switches may seem uninspiring but, once tried, it becomes a mania that you cannot do without. It must be borne in mind that, with the analog modules you work through voltage control, therefore, unlike digital systems, there are no "Steps"; when you change a value, there are no knob resolutions, nor converters that can affect the sound. THE "Volts" they travel fluidly, like lifeblood through circuits and cables, giving life to our electronic creature. We can shape the sound to our liking, exploring new boundaries as far as our imagination (and our pockets) allow. A quick example would be the unusual use of a sequencer connected to control the attack of an envelope or sending voltages to the frequency control of an oscillator running FM on another oscillator… and much more. Suffice it to say that there are modules that, normally, we will never find on a classic synthesizer: filters with multiple resonance points, generators of "Slope" variable that can perform multiple functions (Fig.12) (from small one octave oscillators, lfo, filter, glide .. all in one module), tube filters, complex modifiers that go far beyond the usual LFOs. Unfortunately, as always, space is a tyrant and this single article is perhaps just enough to show you the tip of that great iceberg that is the world of modular units. For the following insights you will have to be patient ... to the next episode. 
Article published in CM2 Magazine. Thanks to Mr. Luke Capozzi for having contributed to the writing of the article.
