Racks and knob-encrusted modules and wires tangling together to make sound – this is a perfectly lovely thing. But the computer sitting in front of you, the one you probably turn to when it comes time to record and produce, is also capable of vast sonic powers. Why force a choice between the two, when that machine can let you explore the frontiers of sound, too?

The recent announcement of OSCiLLOT brought open-ended patching to Ableton Live users. But it’s only getting started. Today, we get to see it evolve, learn to use it to make the sounds we imagine, find out about the development process, and better understand why it matters.

And now is the perfect time, because OSCiLLOT’s creators have been busy beefing up the system they just unveiled. For starters, there’s a new tutorial video to teach you how to use it (top). And, you get two new modules: a comb filter, plus a terrific feedback module that lets you route sound back into your modular rig. (I’m especially pleased about that, as I was getting muddled coming from Pure Data/Pd, in which feedback loop routing works differently. Well, and because generally feedback is great fun.)

OSCiLLOT versus Max 7. First off, let’s clear up some confusion. Cycling ’74’s Max/MSP recently brought its own modular environment to the table, by bundling Max 7 with stretta’s modular patch library BEAP – the feature I called one of the best reasons to upgrade to Max 7. And so some readers assumed that this means OSCiLLOT is redundant. It’s not. If you’re using Max directly for patching, BEAP is still a great environment – one that can help you learn modular synthesis techniques, make some great sonic creations, and connect to outboard gear.

But OSCiLLOT isn’t BEAP. BEAP is a great learning tool, but it’s not so great when it comes to using Max inside Ableton Live. BEAP is monophonic, for one thing; OSCiLLOT gives you polyphony, which makes more sense on a computer. And – here’s the deal-killer – you can’t patch BEAP live when you’re working with Ableton Live. (You have to enter edit mode – and at that point, you’ve lost a true modular feel.)

oscillot_modules

OSCiLLOT, its creators tell CDM, is really built to be a modular instrument running inside Ableton Live. Not only does it support six-voice polyphony, but you can even re-patch your creations as you play inside Live. That makes this much closer to the software equivalent of having physical modules and patch cords, and it transforms OSCiLLOT into a spiritual successor of beloved musicians’ instruments like the now-defunct Nord Modular. (The Nord was specifically an inspiration for the creation of OSCiLLOT, for any of you missing that hardware.)

Co-creator Nico Starke notes that the philosophy of OSCiLLOT is a bit different, as well, architecturally speaking.

I think Oscillot is indeed more tailored to making music. One aspect that is maybe not so obvious at first glance is that many BEAP modules are very large, which makes it a bit tricky to navigate around in a larger patch. Oscillot modules are a bit more optimized in that regard.

By the way, in the end, Nico notes it’d be nice to use BEAP and OSCiLLOT together. If you’re listening, [BEAP creator] Stretta, we’d love to see interoperability here! (Stretta’s talents in the Max and monome communities are incredible, by the way – search for his name and you’ll see what I mean. A Stretta – Nico – Christian team-up is basically a dream team. Anything we can do…)

How it was built. Making OSCiLLOT work this way inside Ableton was a big engineering challenge. “After we had the rough framework working,” co-creator Christian Kleine tells CDM, “the big challenges were the undo system and GUI performance.” That’s right – you get undo. You can learn more about how the product was engineered in an extensive interview Max for Cats’ Nico and Christian did with Madeleine Bloom, published on Madeleine’s site Sonic Bloom:

Creating a Modular System for Ableton Live – Exclusive Interview with the Makers of OSCiLLOT (Part 1) [Sonic Bloom]

Creating a Modular System for Ableton Live – Exclusive Interview with the Makers of OSCiLLOT (Part 2)

(While you’re at it, Madeleine also posted a complete module list, which gives you a clearer overview of what OSCiLLOT actually includes. Madeleine has been a collaborator with Max for Cats and contributed to some discussions around OSCiLLOT’s user interface and architecture.)

Nico adds that the other biggest obstacles were — “getting patch cables to work in a locked patcher / or respectively in Live … saving module data like positions, connections, parameters with a Live set / preset — unfortunately we didn’t get that for free as in traditional Max devices.” And he reiterates that adding undo and redo actions was non-trivial. “[Undo/redo] works automatically in traditional Max devices,” Nico says, “but not in scripted patchers as we use in Oscillot.” And polyphony required some effort, too. “Eventually this was easier than expected,” he concedes, “but it took a while to figure it out.”

All of this, Nico says, added up to four to five years of work. “I took very long breaks in between, but it all started quite some time ago,” he says.

How to use it with hardware. No need to incite a software-versus-hardware modular debate here: OSCiLLOT is something you can combine with a physical setup. Max for Cats promise a tutorial film on that, but in the meantime, users like Fernando Carvalho are already off to the races:

To integrate OSCiLLOT with your modular rig, as with any software/modular integration, you need a DC-coupled audio interface so you can wire your audio interface to your gear.

Not all audio interfaces have that functionality. You’ll find a detailed compatibility list via Expert Sleepers (who make their own fine software for the task):
Silent Way: Device Compatibility

More discussion available on a MuffWiggler thread. (Site down as I write this.)

Basically, just about anything MOTU will work, plus the superb RME FireFace and Apogee Symphony. But so, too, will various cheaper options, including Alesis, so if you weren’t planning on investing in a higher-end option at the moment, you still have choices.

“I’d second Christian’s recommendation for Expert Sleepers interfaces,” says Nico. “These are just fantastic. Other than that, MOTU interfaces will usually work fine, too.”

And the OSCiLLOT team wants to make hardware interfacing still easier. “We’re just finishing up some new helper devices for working with external synths,” Nico tells us, “like a CV calibration tool (for proper 1V/Oct scaling) and a multi-channel CV routing tool. These aren’t necessarily required to control external synths, but will make it a bit more convenient when working with Oscillot.”

Euclidean

But where should you learn more about synthesis? Christian from Max for Cats has some tips for us on that, too. For learning this tool specifically, he tells us, “Reading the Quickstart lesson, trying to understand the examplesm and watching the tutorials seems to me a good start.” But brushing up on the basics is never a bad idea for any of us.

Gordon Reid has done a wonderful series on synthesis that Christian endorses:

Synth Secrets [Sound on Sound]

That’s half a decade of articles you can read there, a free, in-depth course in mastering synthesis. (Ignore the 1999-2004 dates – the stories are just as relevant now. Hey, some skills stand the test of time.)

And Nico says, well, get your hands dirty. “I’d really recommend to just plug stuff together and see what happens,” he says. “The big fun with modular synths is making happy accidents. Maybe start with a simple synth or a simple audio effect to understand how the system works (our first tutorial video should cover the basics), then add more modulators, sequencers, etc.”

Check it out:
https://www.ableton.com/en/packs/oscillot/

http://maxforcats.com

Previously:

OSCiLLOT is a $99 Virtual Modular Rig for Ableton Live – No Cables Needed

Other virtual modulars:

A commenter rightfully punishes us for not mentioning environments beyond Max for Live. In fact, KarmaFX, AAS Tassman 4, and Reaktor are all cross-platform, cost about the same as OSCiLLOT, and give you real-time patching. Each of these can perform some tricks OSCiLLOT can’t – Reaktor, in particular, is a deep environment in which you can do low-level DSP and build your own instruments and effects from the ground up. (That comment curiously omits Reaktor as the most obvious choice, but all three are worth considering.)

OSCiLLOT is without comparison in the Max for Live world – nothing else can do six-voice polyphony, proper undo, and real-time patching in one modular tool. But there are comparisons worth making in the realm of plug-ins. My guess is, if you’re comfortable with Max, you’ll gravitate toward OSCiLLOT; if not, it’s more likely you’d choose one of these other tools.

  • Yermom

    The Echo Audiofire 2 is listed. I’m hoping that extends to the AudioFire 12s I have. I might even get another one just for something like this.

  • Yermom

    The Echo Audiofire 2 is listed. I’m hoping that extends to the AudioFire 12s I have. I might even get another one just for something like this.

  • Tom O’Connor

    Is there any way that this could work with Mira?
    ipad patching would be very cool!

    • Nico Starke

      Unfortunately there is currently no support for bpatchers in Mira (Oscillot modules are bpatchers), so making it patchable in Mira wouldn’t work out of the box. I guess there are ways to achieve this with some tricks, but that could be a bit complicated. Apart from the technical difficulties, it might also need a different approach for the actual UI. The current UI is perhaps a bit too flimsy on an iPad.

      One thing that would work and is not so much effort to implement is showing the currently selected module in Mira, so you can tweak the parameters of a module.

  • Tom O’Connor

    Is there any way that this could work with Mira?
    ipad patching would be very cool!

    • Nico Starke

      Unfortunately there is currently no support for bpatchers in Mira (Oscillot modules are bpatchers), so making it patchable in Mira wouldn’t work out of the box. I guess there are ways to achieve this with some tricks, but that could be a bit complicated. Apart from the technical difficulties, it might also need a different approach for the actual UI. The current UI is perhaps a bit too flimsy on an iPad.

      One thing that would work and is not so much effort to implement is showing the currently selected module in Mira, so you can tweak the parameters of a module.

  • Ycros

    OSCiLLOT uses CV… BEAP uses CV… that means they should already be compatible on a fundamental level, I guess you just need to wrap the BEAP modules so that they play nice in the OSCiLLOT patcher. Maybe there’s a way to automate that/make a generic wrapper.

    • Martin Wheeler

      Not really sure what that avtually means because, obviously neither BEAP nor OSCillot really use CV internally ! There is, of course, no voltage, just numbers, or zeros and ones if you prefer. Obviously you can run numbers coming out of any Max object or patcher into any other Max object or patcher, but that hs nothing to do with “CV” Maybe you mean that the numbers in OSCillot corresponding to 1v/ovtave ( or whatever ) are identical to those in BEAP ? Is that the case ? ( And even if it wasn’t then you’d just need to change the scale in the objects, no ? So ? )

  • OSCiLLOT uses CV… BEAP uses CV… that means they should already be compatible on a fundamental level, I guess you just need to wrap the BEAP modules so that they play nice in the OSCiLLOT patcher. Maybe there’s a way to automate that/make a generic wrapper.

    • Martin Wheeler

      Not really sure what that avtually means because, obviously neither BEAP nor OSCillot really use CV internally ! There is, of course, no voltage, just numbers, or zeros and ones if you prefer. Obviously you can run numbers coming out of any Max object or patcher into any other Max object or patcher, but that hs nothing to do with “CV” Maybe you mean that the numbers in OSCillot corresponding to 1v/ovtave ( or whatever ) are identical to those in BEAP ? Is that the case ? ( And even if it wasn’t then you’d just need to change the scale in the objects, no ? So ? )

  • jkant

    Great system fully integrated with Live. If you have a pc or a pre-Lion Mac with Rosetta, G2 demo (native monophonic) is still there: http://www.nordkeyboards.com/downloads/legacy/nord-modular-g2
    G2 sounds very (very) good, there are 1000s great patches around and you can blend with live (tip: iac, soundflower, external instrument device).
    Should be great to have some sound comparison with oscillot.
    Modular geeks have grown on bread and Allen Strange’s Electronic music: systems, techniques, and controls. 🙂

  • jkant

    Great system fully integrated with Live. If you have a pc or a pre-Lion Mac with Rosetta, G2 demo (native monophonic) is still there: http://www.nordkeyboards.com/downloads/legacy/nord-modular-g2
    G2 sounds very (very) good, there are 1000s great patches around and you can blend with live (tip: iac, soundflower, external instrument device).
    Should be great to have some sound comparison with oscillot.
    Modular geeks have grown on bread and Allen Strange’s Electronic music: systems, techniques, and controls. 🙂

  • pickaboo

    BEAP is not a Max 7 feature; Stretta has put this thing out for, at least, a year and it perfectly runs in Max 6.

  • pickaboo

    BEAP is not a Max 7 feature; Stretta has put this thing out for, at least, a year and it perfectly runs in Max 6.

  • TJ

    How is the overall sound quality or is that really determined by the underlying Max audio engine?

  • TJ

    How is the overall sound quality or is that really determined by the underlying Max audio engine?

  • Marc Nostromo

    On the ‘where do Iearn synthesis’, don’t forget the nord modular one book. First of all it’s an amazing resource. Second, there should be a fairly easy bridge between what it tells and OSCillot. > http://www.cim.mcgill.ca/~clark/nordmodularbook/nm_book_toc.html

  • Marc Nostromo

    On the ‘where do Iearn synthesis’, don’t forget the nord modular one book. First of all it’s an amazing resource. Second, there should be a fairly easy bridge between what it tells and OSCillot. > http://www.cim.mcgill.ca/~clark/nordmodularbook/nm_book_toc.html

  • david

    I really don’t get why this is getting pimped so hard here (two articles in as many weeks?). This here is like an infomercial (“smartest way”, “Nico says…”, “Christan endorses…”). I mean, it’s a cool device and all, but if I want the unfiltered raving sales pitch I’ll go to the website. – No caveats? No hands-on? How is performance? Stability? Latency? How does it compare to existing virtual modular instruments? (From the article you’d think there are none. But why is this such a “smart” choice? – Because m4L?) As a m4L (and hence max6) device, is it fully max7 compatible? How different from BEAP is it really? They offer no demo, so a little actual reporting would be helpful.

    Also, OSCiLLOT does NOT support “full polyphony” (as claimed in the paragraph after the module pics), but six-voice polyphony. That’s a step up from the mono of BEAP, but it’s a far cry from the 16-voice polyphony of the similarly priced and capable KarmaFX, or of course Tassman.

    Generally I’d consider the VST format of KarmaFX or Tassman the ‘smarter’ choice than Ableton’s proprietary m4L format, unless you’re tapping into some very specific m4L advantages (which are those, if any, in this case, aside from hardware breakout?). In any case, at that point you’re clearly not a beginner.

    • maxforcats

      Absolut valid remarks in my opinion and i hope that users/reviewers will step in (i am slightly biased…)

      • Martin Wheeler

        Maxforcats, could you give us some idea of CPU use ? I realise that different modules will involve wildly different CPU hits, but … ( if you are running just Vanilla Live plus a minimum of say an instance of Convolution Pro and a couple of EQ’s / Glue Compressors as the “shell”) … given a hypothetically “average” modules-in-patch distribution with a reasonable amount of sequencing and logic modules, and the appropriate mixers and outs, around how many “voices” of Osc+Filter+VCA or Sampler+Filter+VCA could we get on say a recent MacBookPro ? thanks in advance.

        • maxforcats

          It’s on my plate.

          • Martin Wheeler

            OK. Thanks. I think that this question will be essential to a lot of people’s decision to buy or not, as if you can really put together virtual approximations of sprawling ( here we go again ) west coast / the-circuit-is-the-composition type patches that actually sound half way decent, then a hundred bucks is ridiculously cheap for this … but if you can only get a limited number of synth voices with low polyphony, then unless they sound absolutely spectacular, then, to be blunt, given all the other options that are already there, why bother ? At least until CPU’s become fast enough to justify it … So here’s hoping that it cuts it ! btw I’m guessing that if you were to use it as uniquely as a CV generator to sequence a real modular via Expert Sleepers modules then the CPU load would probably be very light ? If so, personally, I will probably end up buying it anyway, as that would be my principal use for it anyway, but it would be great to be able to mock up a big-ass systemic aleatory patch on the MacBook on the train and come back and plug it straight into the Eurorack ! Exciting times.

        • heinrich zwahlen

          yes good dsp efficiency will be of the essence for me: seeing this thing spiking up just with 3 voices was kind of alarming. other than that i think it’s super cool and i’m considering buying it.

    • Well, headlines… sorry, I absolutely agree that you should consider other options (Tassman, Reaktor, and KarmaFX are all worth a look). So the comparison here is to other Max for Live tools, and there, you’re more restricted in polyphony, undo capability, and live patching … I think this is quantifiably the best option in Max for Live. I think I’m specific on the differences with BEAP, so I actually don’t understand why that keeps coming up.

      Once you get into plug-ins, it’s another story, and sorry, yes, that could use a proper review. Basically, I thought it made sense to expand upon the newly-released video and update and hazard some opinions.

  • david

    I really don’t get why this is getting pimped so hard here (two articles in as many weeks?). This here is like an infomercial (“smartest way”, “Nico says…”, “Christan endorses…”). I mean, it’s a cool device and all, but if I want the unfiltered raving sales pitch I’ll go to the website. – No caveats? No hands-on? How is performance? Stability? Latency? How does it compare to existing virtual modular instruments? (From the article you’d think there are none. But why is this such a “smart” choice? – Because m4L?) As a m4L (and hence max6) device, is it fully max7 compatible? How different from BEAP is it really? They offer no demo, so a little actual reporting would be helpful.

    Also, OSCiLLOT does NOT support “full polyphony” (as claimed in the paragraph after the module pics), but six-voice polyphony. That’s a step up from the mono of BEAP, but it’s a far cry from the 16-voice polyphony of the similarly priced and capable KarmaFX, or of course Tassman.

    Generally I’d consider the VST format of KarmaFX or Tassman the ‘smarter’ choice than Ableton’s proprietary m4L format, unless you’re tapping into some very specific m4L advantages (which are those, if any, in this case, aside from hardware breakout?). In any case, at that point you’re clearly not a beginner.

    • maxforcats

      Absolut valid remarks in my opinion and i hope that users/reviewers will step in (i am slightly biased…)

      • Martin Wheeler

        Maxforcats, could you give us some idea of CPU use ? I realise that different modules will involve wildly different CPU hits, but … ( if you are running just Vanilla Live plus a minimum of say an instance of Convolution Pro and a couple of EQ’s / Glue Compressors as the “shell”) … given a hypothetically “average” modules-in-patch distribution with a reasonable amount of sequencing and logic modules, and the appropriate mixers and outs, around how many “voices” of Osc+Filter+VCA or Sampler+Filter+VCA could we get on say a recent MacBookPro ? thanks in advance.

        • maxforcats

          It’s on my plate.

          • Martin Wheeler

            OK. Thanks. I think that this question will be essential to a lot of people’s decision to buy or not, as if you can really put together virtual approximations of sprawling ( here we go again ) west coast / the-circuit-is-the-composition type patches that actually sound half way decent, then a hundred bucks is ridiculously cheap for this … but if you can only get a limited number of synth voices with low polyphony, then unless they sound absolutely spectacular, then, to be blunt, given all the other options that are already there, why bother ? At least until CPU’s become fast enough to justify it … So here’s hoping that it cuts it ! btw I’m guessing that if you were to use it as uniquely as a CV generator to sequence a real modular via Expert Sleepers modules then the CPU load would probably be very light ? If so, personally, I will probably end up buying it anyway, as that would be my principal use for it anyway, but it would be great to be able to mock up a big-ass systemic aleatory patch on the MacBook on the train and come back and plug it straight into the Eurorack ! Exciting times.

        • heinrich zwahlen

          yes good dsp efficiency will be of the essence for me: seeing this thing spiking up just with 3 voices was kind of alarming. other than that i think it’s super cool and i’m considering buying it.

    • Well, headlines… sorry, I absolutely agree that you should consider other options (Tassman, Reaktor, and KarmaFX are all worth a look). So the comparison here is to other Max for Live tools, and there, you’re more restricted in polyphony, undo capability, and live patching … I think this is quantifiably the best option in Max for Live. I think I’m specific on the differences with BEAP, so I actually don’t understand why that keeps coming up.

      Once you get into plug-ins, it’s another story, and sorry, yes, that could use a proper review. Basically, I thought it made sense to expand upon the newly-released video and update and hazard some opinions.

  • Love the idea of a modular system like this basically right in Live, but I’m curious about the amount of processing power a decent size patch takes…

  • Love the idea of a modular system like this basically right in Live, but I’m curious about the amount of processing power a decent size patch takes…

  • Patrick

    Is this only available for Max For Live? I don’t have Live but I do have Max/MSP so if I bought from the Ableton store would it all come locked up inside an Ableton Set to install or are the .amxd files included separately?

    • maxforcats

      So far it’s only available in Max for Live and won’t work properly otherwise. There are plans for other options but i have no idea yet when this will happen.

  • Patrick

    Is this only available for Max For Live? I don’t have Live but I do have Max/MSP so if I bought from the Ableton store would it all come locked up inside an Ableton Set to install or are the .amxd files included separately?

    • maxforcats

      So far it’s only available in Max for Live and won’t work properly otherwise. There are plans for other options but i have no idea yet when this will happen.

  • leolodreamland

    20% cpu usage with one voice. srsly?

    • maxforcats

      What’s the patch? What’s the machine?
      (i guess all this should be discussed in the Ableton Max forum, i remember a similar thread for the general Live CPU consumption…)
      and: where do you look for the CPU count? Do you know how to interpret the Live/Apple/Win CPU count?
      Generally:
      Polyphony is expensive, yes. UI as well. Is OSCiLLOT usable as Modular environment? In my (obviously quite biased!) opinion: Yes, i have fun not only making but especially using it. Naturally you’ll gain more power from specialized SHARC DSP’s etc. but for a ‘in the box’ solution, i’m personally (as a musician) quite happy so far. We already have plans to optimize things further but not in the near future (= the next months)

      • leolodreamland

        the patch? the machine? in your video.
        i have a ton of stuff going on my sets, for one note playing with one lfo i just couldn’t justify adding that kind of overhead.

        • maxforcats

          Well, in the video, i have a polypatch with 22 % CPU (and the CPU count is for one core of a mulitcore machine) in addition i run the screencast software with their own audio driver – we really should look at proper benchmarks! I’m truly sorry that there’s no demo available and that you have to make uneducated judgements from my video about the usability (CPU-wise).

          • heinrichz

            gotcha, the screencast alone will be a hug ! could you test this with a quad core i7 please?

        • Whoaaaa hold on a second here. The Live CPU meter will definitely register CPU overhead of the screencasting software. 😉

          You really can’t rely on a CPU meter as a reasonable indication of overhead, and you definitely can’t do so watching someone else’s video.

  • leolodreamland

    20% cpu usage with one voice. srsly?

    • maxforcats

      What’s the patch? What’s the machine?
      (i guess all this should be discussed in the Ableton Max forum, i remember a similar thread for the general Live CPU consumption…)
      and: where do you look for the CPU count? Do you know how to interpret the Live/Apple/Win CPU count?
      Generally:
      Polyphony is expensive, yes. UI as well. Is OSCiLLOT usable as Modular environment? In my (obviously quite biased!) opinion: Yes, i have fun not only making but especially using it. Naturally you’ll gain more power from specialized SHARC DSP’s etc. but for a ‘in the box’ solution, i’m personally (as a musician) quite happy so far. We already have plans to optimize things further but not in the near future (= the next months)

      • leolodreamland

        the patch? the machine? in your video.
        i have a ton of stuff going on my sets, for one note playing with one lfo i just couldn’t justify adding that kind of overhead.

        • maxforcats

          Well, in the video, i have a polypatch with 22 % CPU (and the CPU count is for one core of a mulitcore machine) in addition i run the screencast software with their own audio driver – we really should look at proper benchmarks! I’m truly sorry that there’s no demo available and that you have to make uneducated judgements from my video about the usability (CPU-wise).

          • heinrichz

            gotcha, the screencast alone will be a hug ! could you test this with a quad core i7 please?

        • Whoaaaa hold on a second here. The Live CPU meter will definitely register CPU overhead of the screencasting software. 😉

          You really can’t rely on a CPU meter as a reasonable indication of overhead, and you definitely can’t do so watching someone else’s video.

  • Masproduct

    Have two seperate beast (very large) patches running at the same time, all controlled by midi from the first instance of oscillot, with three seperate ableton instruments all controlled by the same midi from patch one which is also sending midi to my a4 which I’ve put an oscillot fx channel on, A few other effects tossed in on a 2010 quad core i7 16. Gig ram pc with a noisy fan running between 75 and 80% cpuon ableton, not bad I have noticed a cpu improvement since the first update, fantastic sound, very flexible and easy to understand, my only gripe is the stopping of audio when a new modul is added, I don’t own max this is what I personally have been wating for, looking forward to further updates. Thanksmaxforcats

    • Martin Wheeler

      Sounds promising, but it’s not clear to me if what you are talking about here involves multiple Oscillot audio voices in addition to Oscillot doing MIDI controlling ” three seperate Ableton instruments. ” MIDI in Max ( and elsewhere ) will of course normally be much CPU lighter than audio.

      • Masproduct

        Sorry I have two oscillot instances in two seperate tracks, track one has the midi out streaming from a playing drum machine within oscillot1 the information to the cv to midi device which I place at the beginning all the other tracks including the other oscillot track(oscillot2). Both oscillot 1 and 2 are playing sounds and contain osc, filters, sequencers, effects ect. I also have a small effects patch which

      • Masproduct

        Ooops sent before I corrected and finished. anyways I have had some cpu problems namely when I go crazy and try to rigg all the devices Up at the same time. I do find that if your sensible you can get quiet a lot out of oscillot

  • Masproduct

    Have two seperate beast (very large) patches running at the same time, all controlled by midi from the first instance of oscillot, with three seperate ableton instruments all controlled by the same midi from patch one which is also sending midi to my a4 which I’ve put an oscillot fx channel on, A few other effects tossed in on a 2010 quad core i7 16. Gig ram pc with a noisy fan running between 75 and 80% cpuon ableton, not bad I have noticed a cpu improvement since the first update, fantastic sound, very flexible and easy to understand, my only gripe is the stopping of audio when a new modul is added, I don’t own max this is what I personally have been wating for, looking forward to further updates. Thanksmaxforcats

    • Martin Wheeler

      Sounds promising, but it’s not clear to me if what you are talking about here involves multiple Oscillot audio voices in addition to Oscillot doing MIDI controlling ” three seperate Ableton instruments. ” MIDI in Max ( and elsewhere ) will of course normally be much CPU lighter than audio.

      • Masproduct

        Sorry I have two oscillot instances in two seperate tracks, track one has the midi out streaming from a playing drum machine within oscillot1 the information to the cv to midi device which I place at the beginning all the other tracks including the other oscillot track(oscillot2). Both oscillot 1 and 2 are playing sounds and contain osc, filters, sequencers, effects ect. I also have a small effects patch which

      • Masproduct

        Ooops sent before I corrected and finished. anyways I have had some cpu problems namely when I go crazy and try to rigg all the devices Up at the same time. I do find that if your sensible you can get quiet a lot out of oscillot

  • Fernando Carvalho

    That was a big surprise, seeing my shitty phone video in CDM!
    Normally my music is more drone/ambient oriented (promo time: check my soundcloud!), but sometimes my modular makes techno for me!
    I’m loving OSCiLLOT and made me to come back to Live with new energy. This thing is really amazing, max for cats work on this is just incredible. I hope it gets supported and improved for a long long time.
    I’m new to hardware modular too, I’m loving it like I was starting with making music again. And yes, it gets adictive!

  • Fernando Carvalho

    That was a big surprise, seeing my shitty phone video in CDM!
    Normally my music is more drone/ambient oriented (promo time: check my soundcloud!), but sometimes my modular makes techno for me!
    I’m loving OSCiLLOT and made me to come back to Live with new energy. This thing is really amazing, max for cats work on this is just incredible. I hope it gets supported and improved for a long long time.
    I’m new to hardware modular too, I’m loving it like I was starting with making music again. And yes, it gets adictive!