Create an envelope like Europa in Thor Synth

[Mohammadyarahmad]

Hello,
I want to create an envelope, like Eutopa, in Thor which has a LFO inside it.
What should I do?
I mean, the speed of the envelope in Europa changes with respect to its LFO and loop over.
I want something just like this.

Thanks

[splitpen]

Why not use the cv out of Europa to the cv in of Thor? Best of both worlds

[huggermugger]

You can set the Global Envelope in Thor to loop, and also to ignore BPM sync so that it has any rate you like. But you won't have the ease of setting the loop length in Hz like you do in Europa. You have to adjust the stages of the ADSR to make the total loop length.

[Mohammadyarahmad]

You can set the Global Envelope in Thor to loop, and also to ignore BPM sync so that it has any rate you like. But you won't have the ease of setting the loop length in Hz like you do in Europa. You have to adjust the stages of the ADSR to make the total loop length.

Thanks for answering the questions and your time in advance. <3

[antic604]

Why not use the cv out of Europa to the cv in of Thor? Best of both worlds

"Best of both worlds" would be if Reason Studios took out the modulation portion of Europa (and Sweeper, which also has audio envelope follower)) and put them together in a new Pulsar 2.

Using a whole synth just for an MSEG envelope feels wasteful and embarrassing.

[selig]

Why not use the cv out of Europa to the cv in of Thor? Best of both worlds

"Best of both worlds" would be if Reason Studios took out the modulation portion of Europa (and Sweeper, which also has audio envelope follower)) and put them together in a new Pulsar 2.

Using a whole synth just for an MSEG envelope feels wasteful and embarrassing.

I’ve been hoping for something like this for some time, here here!

[jam-s]

Using a whole synth just for an MSEG envelope feels wasteful and embarrassing.

At least unlike hardware the Reason synths and REs don't cost per instance.

[Chi-Individual]

"Best of both worlds" would be if Reason Studios took out the modulation portion of Europa (and Sweeper, which also has audio envelope follower)) and put them together in a new Pulsar 2.

+1
My goodness this would be such a welcomed addition in R13

[mimidancer]

Using a whole synth just for an MSEG envelope feels wasteful and embarrassing.

At least unlike hardware the Reason synths and REs don't cost per instance.

I would not think of it as wasteful. It is just thinking modular. In a modular one does not have to use every module on a patch. CV is the best reason to use Reason

[antic604]

At least unlike hardware the Reason synths and REs don't cost per instance.

I would not think of it as wasteful. It is just thinking modular. In a modular one does not have to use every module on a patch. CV is the best reason to use Reason

But it totally is. If you come back to the project several months after, you'll be wondering what is this Europa playing, why you can't hear anything, etc. Also, I never tested this, but there's probably some CPU overhead even with disabled oscillators, which is totally wasteful if all you need is an MSEG.

Obviously this might not bother everyone. I might have some mild form of OCD, because I like my sequencer and rack well organized, with related tracks grouped together, properly colored, etc.

I think Reason should have a battery of separate utility devices to process MIDI, CV and audio and NOT use bits & pieces of existing instruments & FX for that. But that's me, obviously.

[selig]

I would not think of it as wasteful. It is just thinking modular. In a modular one does not have to use every module on a patch. CV is the best reason to use Reason

But it totally is. If you come back to the project several months after, you'll be wondering what is this Europa playing, why you can't hear anything, etc. Also, I never tested this, but there's probably some CPU overhead even with disabled oscillators, which is totally wasteful if all you need is an MSEG.

Obviously this might not bother everyone. I might have some mild form of OCD, because I like my sequencer and rack well organized, with related tracks grouped together, properly colored, etc.

I think Reason should have a battery of separate utility devices to process MIDI, CV and audio and NOT use bits & pieces of existing instruments & FX for that. But that's me, obviously.

IMO you are both 100% in line with my thinking. If there is a workaround, I’ll try it - I’m not opposed to half-measures over no-measures. But ideally I would prefer a single purpose device for stuff like this. And to answer the question about returning to past projects, I’ve got plenty of combinators with a Thor device with labels like “CV Invert” and similar. So I never have those head scratching moments (I DO have other head scratching moments, to be sure!).

If the tape delay in Kong is the best effect from what is available to me, it is not a deal-breaker that it takes an entire instrument to get it. Just a bit overkill.

Same for hardware, my Novation Summit has a sweet FX section that can be used by external instruments. But why waste an entire poly synth for a reverb? Because it sounds good, that’s why!

[antic604]

If the tape delay in Kong is the best effect from what is available to me, it is not a deal-breaker that it takes an entire instrument to get it. Just a bit overkill.

Same for hardware, my Novation Summit has a sweet FX section that can be used by external instruments. But why waste an entire poly synth for a reverb? Because it sounds good, that’s why!

Somehow using an otherwise idle INSTRUMENT device just for its FX section doesn't seem as "wrong" as using an INSTRUMENT for its LFO.

I guess it's a matter of degree, for me

And I guess I'm spoiled by Bitwig

Instruments there don't have any FX section and each device has slots to insert whatever number and type of modulators I might need. THIS is real modularity, IMO - you build bigger patch from smaller bits & pieces, rather than build - usually small - patch using bits of multiple big devices, which are otherwise idle.

[selig]

If the tape delay in Kong is the best effect from what is available to me, it is not a deal-breaker that it takes an entire instrument to get it. Just a bit overkill.

Same for hardware, my Novation Summit has a sweet FX section that can be used by external instruments. But why waste an entire poly synth for a reverb? Because it sounds good, that’s why!

Somehow using an otherwise idle INSTRUMENT device just for its FX section doesn't seem as "wrong" as using an INSTRUMENT for its LFO.

I guess it's a matter of degree, for me

And I guess I'm spoiled by Bitwig

Instruments there don't have any FX section and each device has slots to insert whatever number and type of modulators I might need. THIS is real modularity, IMO - you build bigger patch from smaller bits & pieces, rather than build - usually small - patch using bits of multiple big devices, which are otherwise idle.

You’re preaching to the choir. I don’t think anyone here is saying they PREFER to use an entire instrument for an LFO, although I’ve done exactly that with hardware using HydraSynth’s CV outputs to my Eurorack to use a single LFO on occasion!

I think we are all on the same page in wanting the ultimate modular system when building stuff ourselves. The difference may only lie in our willingness to compromise our ideals when in the heat of the moment. I’m more of a scrappy “use what you got” music maker - when I get hit with an idea I’ll use whatever tools are currently at my disposal to ‘realize’ it. That said, I don’t think my ideal modular DAW exists yet, even among the excellent options out there these days - I still want MORE (and simpler at the same time, dammit!).

[antic604]

You’re preaching to the choir. I don’t think anyone here is saying they PREFER to use an entire instrument for an LFO, although I’ve done exactly that with hardware using HydraSynth’s CV outputs to my Eurorack to use a single LFO on occasion!

I think we are all on the same page in wanting the ultimate modular system when building stuff ourselves. The difference may only lie in our willingness to compromise our ideals when in the heat of the moment. I’m more of a scrappy “use what you got” music maker - when I get hit with an idea I’ll use whatever tools are currently at my disposal to ‘realize’ it. That said, I don’t think my ideal modular DAW exists yet, even among the excellent options out there these days - I still want MORE (and simpler at the same time, dammit!).

There's a lot to be said about putting limitations on yourself - either by necessity, or by choice.

Arguably, the best music I ever wrote was in late 90s, using ProTracker - it was easier to create focused arrangements with only 4 channels of 8-bit samples and unless the FX was baked-in into the sample all I could otherwise use was a manual echo, i.e. I'd follow the main hit by equally spaced, progressively quieter notes (if there was a space on the track)

Right now, I've uninstalled all the DAWs except for Reason from my PC and disabled VSTs - between the factory Reason stuff and 1st and 3rd party REs I bought over the years I have more instruments, samples and FX than I'll ever need (for electronic music, at least).


EDIT: damn, when did I miss my 1000th post!!!

[selig]

There's a lot to be said about putting limitations on yourself - either by necessity, or by choice.

I agree but not in a way that makes your point…
I like to limit myself to Reason devices (for Combinators I want to share, for example), so that often means using an entire synth for an envelope if that's the only way to get what I need.
But it really does make me think a different way than if I had one of "everything" as a module in Reason - that would almost make it "too easy"!

[antic604]

There's a lot to be said about putting limitations on yourself - either by necessity, or by choice.

I agree but not in a way that makes your point…
I like to limit myself to Reason devices (for Combinators I want to share, for example), so that often means using an entire synth for an envelope if that's the only way to get what I need.
But it really does make me think a different way than if I had one of "everything" as a module in Reason - that would almost make it "too easy"!

But that is exactly what I meant.

[mimidancer]

I would not think of it as wasteful. It is just thinking modular. In a modular one does not have to use every module on a patch. CV is the best reason to use Reason

But it totally is. If you come back to the project several months after, you'll be wondering what is this Europa playing, why you can't hear anything, etc. Also, I never tested this, but there's probably some CPU overhead even with disabled oscillators, which is totally wasteful if all you need is an MSEG.

Obviously this might not bother everyone. I might have some mild form of OCD, because I like my sequencer and rack well organized, with related tracks grouped together, properly colored, etc.

I think Reason should have a battery of separate utility devices to process MIDI, CV and audio and NOT use bits & pieces of existing instruments & FX for that. But that's me, obviously.

I feel that especially if you are working at the limit of your system. I have a hybrid workflow so many instruments in my rack exist without taxing my system. I also agree with you that having just the mod section as a rack would be useful. I will suggest one more module for you to try. Pulsar has an AR envelope that can be triggered by LFO 2. So it can be cycled and clocked. Since it is a basic modulation module it may not disturb your OCD. Be well, make something you want to hear.

Screenshot 2024-01-30 132901.png

[antic604]

But it totally is. If you come back to the project several months after, you'll be wondering what is this Europa playing, why you can't hear anything, etc. Also, I never tested this, but there's probably some CPU overhead even with disabled oscillators, which is totally wasteful if all you need is an MSEG.

Obviously this might not bother everyone. I might have some mild form of OCD, because I like my sequencer and rack well organized, with related tracks grouped together, properly colored, etc.

I think Reason should have a battery of separate utility devices to process MIDI, CV and audio and NOT use bits & pieces of existing instruments & FX for that. But that's me, obviously.

I feel that especially if you are working at the limit of your system. I have a hybrid workflow so many instruments in my rack exist without taxing my system. I also agree with you that having just the mod section as a rack would be useful. I will suggest one more module for you to try. Pulsar has an AR envelope that can be triggered by LFO 2. So it can be cycled and clocked. Since it is a basic modulation module it may not disturb your OCD. Be well, make something you want to hear.Screenshot 2024-01-30 132901.png

Oh, I know all about how Pulsar works...

[mimidancer]

I feel that especially if you are working at the limit of your system. I have a hybrid workflow so many instruments in my rack exist without taxing my system. I also agree with you that having just the mod section as a rack would be useful. I will suggest one more module for you to try. Pulsar has an AR envelope that can be triggered by LFO 2. So it can be cycled and clocked. Since it is a basic modulation module it may not disturb your OCD. Be well, make something you want to hear.Screenshot 2024-01-30 132901.png

Oh, I know all about how Pulsar works...

My bad, Also I have never seen that video. Hate to see that guy on a modular if he thinks that is cord hell.

[antic604]

My bad, Also I have never seen that video. Hate to see that guy on a modular if he thinks that is cord hell.

Oh boy.

[selig]

I agree but not in a way that makes your point…
I like to limit myself to Reason devices (for Combinators I want to share, for example), so that often means using an entire synth for an envelope if that's the only way to get what I need.
But it really does make me think a different way than if I had one of "everything" as a module in Reason - that would almost make it "too easy"!

But that is exactly what I meant.

Wait, so we are both embracing using an entire synth for an envelope, or no?

[mimidancer]

But that is exactly what I meant.

Wait, so we are both embracing using an entire synth for an envelope, or no?

I use parts of synths for whatever I need. It is no different than any modular to me. But I do not have the system limitations he expressed. For me, yes.

[antic604]

But that is exactly what I meant.

Wait, so we are both embracing using an entire synth for an envelope, or no?

Sure, if there's no other way. But I don't have to be happy about it

[moofi]

Jiggery Pokery´s Charlotte should do what you like Then it is missing the easy display, yet aren´t there additional RE being capable of doings so as well? CV-Mutant coming to mind as well, inhabiting a display.

[antic604]

Jiggery Pokery´s Charlotte should do what you like Then it is missing the easy display, yet aren´t there additional RE being capable of doings so as well? CV-Mutant coming to mind as well, inhabiting a display.

Yeah, there's couple of 3rd party REs that do LFO, MSEG, Env. Follower.

What I mean is those should be native, coming "free" with the DAW. If you sell a DAW advertising it as "modular", then the basic tools should come included, like - outdated, by today's standards - Pulsar.