ilovefuzz.com

Well, yes and more. You can use them as a simple mixer but in various ways (4 in-1out, 2in-2out, 1in-4out, etc) or you can create feedback loops with it blending in different oscillations from a fuzz, for example, with a sample you have running into a different input, feeding into a delay that is also feeding its own feedback loop and then out. And that's just one example.

Im gonna see if i can illustrate this a bit better. Assume you have 4 in and 4 out. The in's are 1 thru 4. the outs are A thru B. Think of the knobs as corresponding to what they control 1A, 1B, 1C, 1D, etc.

So if you have an iput source into 1. Control 1D controls how much of the input source from 1 goes to out D which we will consider the main out for this. Now lets take a send from out A and run it into a fuzz that will oscillate in a feedback looper and send the output from the fuzz to input 2. Now 1A sends input source variably to the fuzz. 2A sends the fuzz back into itself. 2D sends variable amount to the main D out. Tracking so far? Now lets take a send from out B into a delay and into input 3. 1B sends variable source input into the delay. 2B sends the fuzz soup variably into the delay. 3B sends delay back into itself. 3A adds delay to the fuzz input. 3D sends variable delay soup into main Out D. I hope this makes sense haha. But you can see it can create some pretty dense and highly tweakable textures that can all be routed where ever you want them to go in variable amounts.

ognoy wrote:

I understand that's from an Australian "________ Got Talent" type thing, but I've not seen it (just the preview that spawned it). Anyone know exactly what act blew Beaker's mind?

So if you wanted to emulate a Patchulator 8000, Signal would go into in 1. out/FX A would have to go into in 2, out/FX B into in 3, C in 4, and D sends signal down the chain.
Set the knobs 1A, 2B, 3C & 4D to max, all others to minimum = linear path 1-2-3-4. Adding any of the other knobs starts creating feedbackloops.

Set the knobs 1D, 2C, 3B, 4A to max, all others to min = swift reversal of effects chain,

Yeah matrix mixers can get particularly crazy just for feedback looping. A passive version is super easy to build if you have basic soldering skills, the main issue with a passive one is loss in volume.

Pladask wrote:

I've been trying to get a builder to make me a pedal version of the Moog 984 for years.

I'm right here waiting ..but would suggest an Op Amp based implementation!

We'll definitely have to talk come january!

Actually, I wrote bollocks

if you set 1D to max and all other 1s to min = you completely bypass the rest of the matrix...
So a 4x4 loses 1x1 for In & Out, and leaves you with a freely placable 3x3?

Also you could place your FX as "everything going out X goes thru FX"
or "everything coming in Y goes thru FX".....

I'll have to dream about that tonight, see you tomorrow folks!


And come January DRods 984 gets hooked up with an 856?

DRodriguez wrote:I've been trying to get a builder to make me a pedal version of the Moog 984 for years. Schematics available, basically a 4x4 matrix mixer with active moog bass and treble boosts/cuts per channel and a master out. Look at this sex:

now we are talking!

Think I'm gonna have to build one of those just to see whether I can cause my amp to explode.

jrfox92 wrote:

That'S exactly right!

Depending on the quality of your amp, your brain might explode first, either for sheer joy or utter confusion.
Can't wait to see a pedalboard-friendly version of this.




Edit:

ProCarsteNation wrote:Also you could place your FX as "everything going out X goes thru FX"
or "everything coming in Y goes thru FX".....

I no longer think that would make any difference for Patchulatoring your matrix. Good night for realz

Hey there veni vidret vici,
I thought the numbers were the ins & the outs were letters!
now it all makes sense

I just got a passive one in the mail and my mind has exploded. Running an HM-2 and RV-5, I can get clean blend plus some clean reverb and reverb into the HM-2 but put it into the background. So many textures with all the routing and level possibilities.

I want to build one of these at like 8x8, active, with a dedicated output, and with a micro-controller to save presets and play around with automation of feedback loops. I probably have better things to do with my time, though.

I just got a passive one in the mail and my mind has exploded. Running an HM-2 and RV-5, I can get clean blend plus some clean reverb and reverb into the HM-2 but put it into the background. So many textures with all the routing and level possibilities.

I want to build one of these at like 8x8, active, with a dedicated output, and with a micro-controller to save presets and play around with automation of feedback loops. I probably have better things to do with my time, though.

vidret wrote:sorry i disappointed you sensei-sama-san

no such thing as disappppoint happened, it must have been I who misunderstood.
Please rephrase/clarify your request
I'll do my best to deliver

Ah, thank you!
All is splendid then
I was explaining & exploring at the same time, so ran into a few wait-that's-not-how-this-would-works.
Here's what I boiled it down to:

Just like with the Patchulator 1 in & 1 Out of a matrix is for instrument & amp.
So both the P8000 & an 8 x 8 matrix would give you 7 movable fx slots.
(This is assuming our goal is one instrument into one amp, changing the order of fx, possibly feedbackloops.)

The proposed cabling stands: Instrument comes in A, out1 into B, 2 into C etc. last number goes out to amp.
meaning the only way to send something into C would be out 2, so everything that goes out 2 definitely goes into C.
So whether I think of the FX in between 2 & C as after 2 or before C = same slot.

vidret wrote:ok let's do this:


A1 | A2 | A3 | A4: A IN

B1 | B2 | B3 | B4: B IN

C1 | C2 | C3 | C4: C IN

D1 | D2 | D3 | D4: D IN

1 - 2 - 3 - 4 OUTS

For the 4x4 above you would have 3 slots:
Slot1 between 1/B, Slot2 between 2/C, Slot3 3/D. Out 4 always leaves the matrix & goes to amp.

Then A1, B2, C3, D4 max, rest min = in-Slot1-Slot2-Slot3-Out
And A3, D2, C1, B4 max, rest min = in-Slot3-Slot2-Slot1-Out = reversed order


Yes!


OH: Did I just explain (again!) what was perfectly clear to everybody anyway?
I just don't know anymore...
Good Night!