Taming the Freqbox

The Moog Forum Moogerfooger Forum
1

I have had a Freqbox for about a week not but today was the first day I was able to do some experimentation with it. Rather than having it track my guitar, which it certainly can do, I had it track my voice. It did but I can’t say I have the kind of vocal control that Tara Busch has in here post on You Tube.

I think the Freqbox has some very serious uses. One of the most singnificant I wan’t to test this week by sidechainging and envelope follow to change frequency and using some persucssive instruments. I want to see how I can shape its response. With carefully use, this box can do some really interesting experimental things.

I was listening to some George Crumb earlier tonight, highly recommended:

http://www.buchla.com/series200e.html

What is interesting about Crumb is that he uses a great many percussive instruments but also non standard uses of traditional instruments many of which chnage the natural pitch envelope of the instrument or make it more atonal. It seems to be that Crumb would have liked the Freqbox.

I think that many think of the Freqbox as being used in genres like hip hop or techno or some of the other related genres but to be, a more classical approach to this box would be more effective. I always look to classical music, exspecially that of the early 20th century, as more of a guide than the pop genres of today which often make electronic tools something cliches and cheap. The Freqbox is worthy of serious experimental use and hopefully I am up to the task of finding those uses.

Crumb is perhaps a good place to start.

2

i don’t understand buchla’s pricing… :question: or how that relates to george crumb

3

I studied Black Angels a bunch in my college years… great composer!

4

Sorry, that was a mispost. I was posting on the Buchla controller in another board. This should have been a link to this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5OsuzSXU-k

Crumb, an American composer (20th century) was famous for his use of extended instruments (techniques outside of the standard usage).

5

speaking of dark angels :slight_smile:



have you seen the score?

6

Crumb’s score? No but I would like to have it. I have many of the scores of 20th century composers. There are some great ideas in these. I wish I could say that I get my inspiration from pop composers but sadly much of what I see out there is re-hashed garbage that never made it when it first came out. Bands claim to be different and are not. No one wants to take chances anymore and do something different. It’s what I love about the 20th century classical composers. Not so much the serial composers (not a fan of serialism) but the ones that did not adhere strickly to serialism or the past.

Unformtuntely, the digitial synthesizers are full of cliched presets. I like mine and having a whole symphony at my fingertips is not a bad thing. But it seems to be the real sonic frontiers are in analogue. When I start plugging my foogers into things, I have only a general idea of what is going to happen but there is a certain untamed aspect of foogers that I really love. I love that turning the resonance know of the LPF sends it into self osciillation, I love the quirky sounds I get from using a microphone with it and sending differerent sounds through it.

Digital synths are in a way much more flexible. But in a way, the samples they use are limted. You can buy libraries that are more expansive but you are stuck with the samples. There is a wonderful world of sound out there that just needs to be opened up but it takes a boldness to explore it.

7

I’m a guitarist, I think my favorite thing about the freq box is it’s freak-ish nature. It’s not easily tamed without some kind of damper in front and behind it, like a compressor and a filter - or really precise picking of the guitar strings. I think that’s what sets it apart from everything else is the fact that what you put into it changes what you get out…

Quite outright, I’m not using it for techno, I’m using it as a guitar synth for music of a hard rock based nature. My hands control the ADSR (strings) on the fly, and with the right notes you get some amazing overtones that I have never heard anything else emphasize this well. I really would say that it did complete the whole ‘modular’ appeal of the foogers to a limited degree of course.

I really would like to have a more mellow VCO sound from it on hand, but I think I can still find it using the matrix of filter pedals that I have, and careful input control. And I’m always looking for a Pitch to CV tracking unit to use the filter and ring mod oscillators for this.

8

I like it because it has such an immediate responce, if you send a kick drum and a hi hat to it they are going to sound totally different because of their frequencies AND their volumes. THe Freqbox is lightning fast so as long as you aren’t approaching polyphony then its still pretty precise.
I have a demo where I ran a drum machine through my Fooger Rig

Reverbnation.com/rhythmicondemos
“Droppin a dub”

Eric

9

Yes, I can see where the freqbox would enhance guitar harmonics. At the right mix level it might be transparent and the listener would be wondering how you get that type of distortion when in fact, its not distoration at all but an oscillator.

I would think the LPF could filter the oscillator sound or for that matter a wah or equalizer.

On the issue of pitch to CV. I forget which post but this issue has been discussed here. For current products you would probably need to go with a modular component if you have a modular. I don’t know of any stomp boxes that do pitch to CV although I would love to have a fooger with a frequency follower.

The freqbox is doing a hard sync not pitch to CV which is why its so quick, in fact, instananiious.

10

Yes, I noticed this. I was using a mic with it the other day and of course, it will track vocals and also do some interesting things with different vocalization but it even hitting a glass with water in it will generate a pitch. I want to do some experiments tonight with bowed instruments from Tassman and String Studio (Applied Acoustic Systems).

I also want to see what it does with noise. I may use it for my current project and see what it does with trains and helicopter sounds.

I also have my CP-251, just came in yesterday. I unpacked it but have not done anything with it yet. I am very impressed happy with the possiblities. I started to do some CV rooting yesterday and realized that a multi would help. I also can’t wait to see what I can do with the lag processor.

11

My favorite aspect of the CP Freq combination (I got both units together, it was so neat to open two boxes…it was like christmas) is that With another synth like the Voyager or anything with an audio input, its just like having a second seperate synth to mess around with. You can take your Voyager or your theremin and do your thing there and then bring up the VOlume of the Freq (like on a mixer or something else) and your CP is sending a S&H to the Freq or another Lagged LFO to the Freq, so basically it allows you to accompany yourself. Its really a cool thing, I thnk thats screaming for a filter of some kind.

My Video “Complex Waveform with MoogerFoogers” on youtube is ALL Freqbox and just a Lag Processor with LFO’s from every source that I could muster. I turned this into a song that I could perform live where the Freqbox is almost percussive and the Voyager lays down a bass line.

THe CP is like a modulation Bus…I think the MP201 would be a great modulator as well especially coupled with the CP.

Check out the video if you haven’t already, its a SYnthesists eye view of whats going on with a MoogerFooger/Voyager system.

Eric

12

Saw the videos which are a good introduction on how to patch foogers and the Voyager to the CP-251. I guess in the long run I am much more inclined now to get a full blown modular than a Voyager.

A few reason for this. First, Plan-B, Doepfer and probably some other modular makers have vactrols. I am a big fan of Morton Subotnick who used Buchla synths which had vactrols and are certainly part of the Buchla sound. Don’t get me wrong, I love Moog stuff to and I have certainly invested major $s in foogers lately but Moog is not longer making modulars.

Here is a classic example from Doepfer and Plan B:

Doepfer: http://www.doepfer.de/home_e.htm
Plan B:
http://www.ear-group.net/model_13.html (vactrols inside!)

Second, there are a lot of nice modules with multiple filters and effects that can create much more complex setups than the foogers. A quick look at some of the modules out there and you can see that.

Third, I like the idea of having a frequency follower. Here is Analogue Systems version:

http://www.analoguesystems.co.uk/modules/rs30.htm

I also have a Korg M3 with a Radius expansion option. This is certainly a synth that is not afraid of being digital but with an analogue emulator inside, I can get presets that have an analogue sound to them. The Voyager or Litte Phatty would really not have that much to offer me so probably, my next major purchase will be at least a base level anlogue modular with lots of room to grow.

13

I don’t want to be a killjoy but you REALLY have to take a look at the several looong threads http://www.muffwiggler.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=16 before even thinking about spending any money on Plan B products. I have several modules, but their business practices, attitude to customers and quality control are awful to the point of being just about unbelievable. Sorry to drag it in here but I do think the whole modular community needs to be aware of what is going on there…

on a brighter note Harvestman, Doepfer, Livewire, Make Noise, Bugbrand, Flight of Harmony and others are making fantastic stuff and seem far more reliable sources. Moog really should join this group of manufacturers, a great modular resurgence is taking place out there guys!!!

14

Thanks for that, I appreciate the advice. I read the SOS article on modulars, come good advice, but they did not seem to say anything negative about Plan B although I have to admit, that they did not say anything negative about anyone. Doepfer got come very positive comments.

You did not mention Cwejman. What do you think of them? I probably am going Eurorack and I like some of their modules. Not great for building from scatch but nice stuff to add to a basic modular.

What attracted me to Plan B is that they have vactrols. Then again, so does Doepfer but their modules look a bit more interesting. I also have some intersting in Cynthia. Specialty stuff but I like their oscillator and possible the woggle bug.

I would love to see Moog Music back in the modular business. I always thing of Keith Emerson’s beast that he took on stage:

Here he is being introduced at the Moogfest by the man himself:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6y1htz6jGE

Not sure what he is using here but certainly a modular.

And yes, modulars are jumping up all over the place. The number of modular makes far exceeds that of digital synths. I would love to see Moog Music put some really interesting modules out there so complement the fooger line.

15

I wonder if using the sonuus g2m (audio to midi converter) into a midi>cv converter into the freqbox freq in would give you that smooth oscillator sound. The audio out of the g2m would go into the audio in of the freqbox and then audio out of the freq to what ever, with sync off and mix 100%…I think that might work actually I wish I owned either of those so I could try it

16

I presume this is what you are talking about:

http://www.petersontuners.com/sonuusgw

In general, I am against any pitch to MIDI conversion for several reasons.

First, there are latency problems and false triggering. Clearly, this unit is being marketed based not on low latency like the “Axon”:

http://www.axon-technologies.net/modules.php?op=modload&name=Sections&file=index&req=viewarticle&artid=84&menu=10103

But rather, “robust triggering” which means, less false triggers. I agree to some extent that the problem with guitar synths is more an issue of false triggers than latency although latency is certainly an issue.

This unit also does not use special pickups. In many ways an advantage but also realize that its those special pickups that allow each string to be a separate MIDI channel allowing for special tunings and other interesting MIDI triciks.

One must realize that latency is an issue that can’t be eliminated. It’s not a matter of better technology it is inherant in how units such as this determine pitch. Without going into the mathematics, which I do understand, there is an inherant blur between time and frequency.

Some have commented here that the freqbox responds very fast. It actually responds in an instant because its not converting frequency but using hard sync. For this reason, and why I really like it, its organic.

I also did not buy my freqbox for guitar. Frankly, I don’t need to make my guitar sound like a synth. I play keyboards as well. I also have one of these:

http://www.starrlabs.com/

Starr Labs makes custom fretboard based MIDI controllers. It’s more like keyboard in the form of a freboard. It has no more latency than a MIDI keyboard and it will not mistrigger unless you play the wrong note. It also has some awsome advanges. First, you can play chords and second, you can do some incredible things with tapping and right hand technique. Example:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FjYdxAxwaA

Bottom line, I let a guitar be a guitar. In many ways, outside the cost issue, Moog was smart to create the Moog Guitar. I really like it just not the price. The Moog Guitar does no pitch to MIDI conversion. Its a guitar but it has some enhancements that expand what a guitar can do.

What I also don’t like about pitch to MIDI is when it translates pitch, it sound unatural on a oscillator. The transient portion of a not is highly complex If you look at a sonogram of any non bowed, no perscussive instrument you will see that after the initial attack phase, the sonogram will stabilize but before then, it is complex.

I have spend a lot of time working with additive synthesizers and it’s really for this reason that I am not a fan of additive synthesis because I understand the limitations of the model that tells us that any sounds is just a serious of harmonics that change pitch and amplitude in time. This is not really true but again, I will not go into the mathematics of it. The fast fourier transform, what is used for pitch to MIDI, makes sense for a stable waveform but when we are talking transients, time has to be windowed, broken up into frames, and thats were the whole problem comes in. Bottom line, it does not work and to me, pitch envelopes for pitch to MIDI sound artifical to me.

Guitars have great transients. Its what gives each guitarist a unique sound. Why we want to turn them into a synthesizer is beyond me other than a guitarist wanting to be able to play a synth and the ZTar will do that. A freqbox is not a synthesizer. Its a hard sync effect which has been around for a while but a nice implemenation by Moog. Its organic, analogue and beautiful.

Now I would like an analogue pitch follower but no pitch to MIDI.

I have a MIDI to CV but I got that to integrate with my digital synth, not my guitar.

17

First off those star lab controllers look amazing, I never heard of them before. Definately look more reliable than the casio midi guitars lol, although they are fun.

And by no means was I suggesting that this would be the best option to control the freqbox, just a different way for guitar players to experiment and gain control over the pitch of the oscillator with out having to use hard sync, and it seemed like there are a couple people who want to achieve this. And this is a relatively inexpensive route to go. So yes the starlab controllers are very nice BUT a freqbox, sonuus g2m, and a midi>cv converter are A LOT cheaper. Im not going to go into the mathematics of it because that is an equation we can all understand. :wink:

18

I do have a Starr Lab’s controller. I can assure you its not toy like the Casio hoverer fun. They are customed designed to spec by Harvey Starr in fact, when I ordered mind I spoke directly with Harvey. For this reason they are not mass produced and therefore not cheap but if you are a guitar player and don’t care for pitch to MIDI (and I don’t as I stated), then this is a good way to go. They also offer a number of other alternative keyboards which look interesting (and expensive). How expensive is a matter of what you put on them. Mine has a ribbon controller and joystick along with string triggers.

The sound is up to you. You can get synth boards for them but I just run mine though the MIDI in on MIDI keyboard. They end up opening up performance avenues that are not possible with any other instrument.

The only negative I would report is that the distance between frets is uniform so if you have developed positional memory on the fretboard, as I have, it will not mesh.

I also agree that this is a cheaper option than a modular. I just dont’ like way pitch to MIDI works but that is my personal gripe and why I bought a ZTar. One thing I have got to try is go MIDI to CV (I have a box) from the ZTar to the foogers. Lots of interesting possbilities.

19

Since this thread is called “Taming The FreqBox”, I thought I would put up a link to a YouTube gear demo video I made for the unit.

This demo is specifically for guitar applications:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvNzjZJVVdw

20

Nice work. Frankly, a better demonstration that Moog. I am surpised they have not tried to put a demo out that makes the Freqbox sound mor tame. Clearly, as you have said, both distortion and compression have a lot to do with taming it as well as the use of the neck pickup. The reason the neck works better is that its going to elimnate some of the trasient nature of the guitar as is compression.

So once again, great demo clearly showing the there is a tamer nature to the freqbox with guitar.