VIKTOR'SMODULAR_SYNTHDIARY

Live set prep with the travel rack.

Two excerpts from a practice session. 0-Ctrl sequencing XPO into Multigrain. Untitled 51, 2:00–4:00. Untitled 51, 7:00–end.

---

Patch Notes

0-Ctrl ─▶ XPO ─▶ Multigrain ─▶ [out]

0-Ctrl driving XPO — pitch and pressure from the 0-Ctrl sequencing the oscillator. XPO output into Multigrain for granular processing.

Three takes from a practice session. Maths in bouncing ball mode driving XPO, filtered through QPAS, recorded live into Morphagene, Erbe-Verb for reverb. Ultra-Kick as kick. Untitled 44, 0:00–3:10. Untitled 43, 0:00–2:40. Untitled 45, 0:00–3:30.

---

Patch Notes

Maths (bounce) ─▶ XPO MODULATE-L
               └─▶ XPO MODULATE-R

XPO (var sine) ─▶ QPAS RADIATE-L
               └─▶ QPAS RADIATE-R

XPO (saw) ─▶ QPAS IN ─▶ Morphagene (live rec) ─▶ Erbe-Verb ─▶ [out]

Maths Ch1 (unity out) ─▶ XPO FM
Maths Ch1 (unity out) ─▶ QPAS FREQ CV

Ultra-Kick ─▶ [kick drum]

Maths running in bouncing ball mode — driving XPO’s modulate inputs. XPO’s variable sine then feeds the QPAS radiate inputs, modulating the filter’s spatial spread. The saw wave is the main audio signal going into QPAS. Maths Ch1 unity out modulates both XPO FM and QPAS filter frequency. Out of QPAS into Morphagene for live recording, then Erbe-Verb for a touch of reverb. Ultra-Kick underneath as kick drum.

Two excerpts exploring DPO sine wave crossfading through ModDemix into QPAS and Mimeophon. Untitled 40, 0:00–1:05. Untitled 39, 1:40–2:40.

---

Patch Notes

DPO VCO A (Sine) ─┐
                   ├─▶ ModDemix ─▶ QPAS ─▶ Mimeophon
DPO VCO B (Sine) ─┘

Both oscillators running sine waves from the DPO — VCO A and VCO B fed into ModDemix, which blends and combines them before the signal moves on. Out of ModDemix into QPAS for filtering, then into Mimeophon for space and texture.

V/oct on the DPO is driven by Bard Quartet Arps, giving the pitch sequence its melodic character.

---

Patch Notes

Modules: Multimod, Polimaths, Tiny Rise and Fall, DPO, QPAS, QXG, XPO, Spectraphon, Morphagene, Bruxa, Ableton Live + Meld

---

Clock & Modulation

Multimod runs as master clock in Red shape mode. It triggers Polimaths in Yellow (activate) mode. Tiny Rise and Fall handles envelope shaping with no rate and no oscillator engaged — acting as a pure slew/transient shaper on the modulation signals coming out of Polimaths.

Polimaths Routing (8 outputs)

Output	Destination
1	DPO — Fold input
2	QPAS — Volume + Freq 1
3–6	QXG — inputs
7–8	XPO — Left & Right Modulate

Audio Signal Flow

• DPO Square wave → QPAS (audio input)
• Spectraphon (all 4 outputs) → QXG (all 4 inputs)
• XPO Variable output → DXG (mix)
• QPAS Low Pass output → DXG
• QXG output → DXG

Drone Layer

The drone comes from Morphagene, loaded with a chord recorded in Ableton Live using Meld — voicing G2 / D3 / F3 with minimal LFO modulation applied before recording. From Morphagene the signal goes into Bruxa, with Multimod modulating Bruxa’s filter for subtle movement.

Listen before acting

In modular synthesis, it’s easy to develop the habit of constantly turning knobs.

A sound appears.

Adjust something.

Another modulation.

Another voice.

Another effect.

But after a while the patch never has a chance to become what it wants to become.

Onkyō musicians often do the opposite. They make an almost imperceptible change, then wait. Sometimes for thirty seconds. Sometimes for minutes.

The performance isn’t built from dramatic gestures. It’s built from listening.

Contact improvisation

In contact improvisation, beginners often think they need to keep creating movement.

I certainly did.

But many of the most useful things I’ve learned have been about doing less:

• Stay with the point of contact.
• Follow momentum instead of creating it.
• Don’t rush to the next idea.
• Trust your partner.
• Let the dance unfold before trying to steer it.

The dance already contains information.

If I’m constantly initiating, I’m no longer listening.

Don’t interrupt the system

The phrase that keeps coming back to me is:

Don’t interrupt the system.

A modular patch is already evolving.

Two bodies in contact are already evolving.

The room is already evolving.

The interesting question isn’t, “What should I do next?”

It’s:

“What is already happening?”

Instead of generating material, the job becomes noticing where the energy already wants to go.

Small gestures matter

A one-millimeter movement on an FM index can slowly transform the entire texture over the next minute.

A slight shift of weight in contact improvisation can redirect two people’s movement without either person consciously deciding to “lead.”

The action is small.

The consequence is large.

Space is part of the performance

One of the hardest things to trust is silence.

Or stillness.

In music, there’s a temptation to fill every moment with sound.

In dance, there’s a temptation to fill every pause with movement.

But those empty spaces aren’t empty.

They’re where attention grows.

They’re where the audience leans in.

They’re where your partner has room to respond.

Discovered her through Patch & Tweak.

“I just left myself play with what I want and trust my taste.”

Three pieces, three completely different approaches — but the same restraint running through all of them.

• What Is To Be Done? — dark and melodic, almost purely harmonic (H/P 4.67×), with enough rubato to feel hand-played rather than sequenced
• Abstract — percussion and melody weighted equally (H/P 1.01×), much sparser, rhythm tells the story through a deliberate arc: silence, percussion building to a peak, then receding
• Paris Texas — percussion stripped out almost completely (H/P 9.23×), bright and tonally stable in Eb major, the clearest key of the three, the slowest tempo, the most cinematic

---

What Is To Be Done?

Timbre & Texture

• Spectral centroid: 1,538 Hz — warm, mid-focused sound; not bright or harsh
• Spectral rolloff (85%): 3,088 Hz — the vast majority of energy sits below 3kHz, confirming a dark, intimate character
• Zero-crossing rate: 0.026 — low, consistent with tonal/melodic content rather than noise or distortion
• H/P ratio: 4.67× — strongly harmonic-dominant; melodic/harmonic layers far outweigh percussive transients (think piano, strings, or sustained synths over drums)

Dynamics

• Mean RMS: 0.193 — moderately loud on average
• Dynamic range: 0.000 → 0.572 — significant variation, with moments of near silence and peaks; likely builds in intensity
• Onset std/mean ratio: 1.80 — high variability in attack strength, suggesting expressiveness or rubato phrasing rather than a rigid grid

Structure (8 detected sections)

Section	Time	Duration
Intro	0:00	19s
A	0:19	~1:00
Transition	1:18	22s
B	1:41	40s
Bridge	2:21	19s
C	2:40	48s
D / climax?	3:28	34s
Outro	4:02	26s

---

Summary

An introspective, harmonically rich piece in F minor — slow-burning at ~129 BPM but with enough rubato to feel unquantized. The harmonic-to-percussive ratio and low spectral rolloff strongly suggest acoustic or semi-acoustic instrumentation with piano prominent. The 8-segment structure with a long first section and shorter later sections follows a classic through-composed arc. The title references Chernyshevsky/Lenin’s political text, hinting at intentional conceptual weight in the music too.

---

Abstract

Timbre & Texture

• Spectral centroid: 1,692 Hz — slightly brighter than What Is To Be Done? (1,538 Hz)
• Spectral rolloff: 2,767 Hz — energy even more concentrated in the lows despite the brighter centroid
• Zero-crossing rate: 0.045 — nearly double WITBD’s 0.026; more transient/noisy content present
• H/P ratio: 1.01× — the most striking difference: almost perfectly balanced between harmonic and percussive layers, vs WITBD’s 4.67×. Far more rhythmic and textural

Dynamics

• Mean RMS: 0.051 — much sparser and quieter than WITBD (0.193); lots of breathing room
• Dynamic range: 0.000 → 0.637 — a very wide range, suggesting sharp contrasts between silence and peaks
• Onset std/mean ratio: 1.71 — similarly expressive attack variation

Structure (8 detected sections)

Section	Time	Duration
Intro	0:00	33s
A	0:33	13s
B	0:46	28s
C	1:14	56s
D	2:10	20s
E	2:30	34s
Outro	3:04	16s

---

Summary

The H/P ratio flip (1.01× vs 4.67×) is the biggest tell between the two pieces — Abstract leans into texture and rhythm as much as melody, where What Is To Be Done? is almost purely melodic. The much lower mean RMS makes Abstract feel more spacious and sparse. D minor at 126 BPM. Same artist, clearly different intent.

---

Paris Texas

Timbre & Texture

• Spectral centroid: 2,141 Hz — the brightest of the three; noticeably more air and presence
• Spectral rolloff: 4,220 Hz — significantly more high-frequency energy than WITBD (3,088 Hz) or Abstract (2,767 Hz)
• Zero-crossing rate: 0.054 — highest of the three; could suggest bowed strings, textured pads, or layered timbres
• H/P ratio: 9.23× — the most harmonically pure of all three; almost no percussive content at all

Dynamics

• Mean RMS: 0.093 — sits between WITBD (0.193) and Abstract (0.051); moderate density
• Dynamic range: 0.000 → 0.328 — tighter peaks than the other two; more controlled, less explosive
• Onset std/mean ratio: 0.90 — the most rhythmically even of the three; attacks are regular rather than rubato

Structure (8 detected sections)

Section	Time	Duration
Intro	0:00	13s
A	0:13	42s
B	0:56	35s
C	1:31	30s
D	2:00	58s
E	2:59	28s
Outro	3:27	9s

---

Summary

Paris Texas is the most tonally centered of the three — Eb major with a correlation of 0.747 (vs 0.455 and 0.334 for the others), meaning the key is unusually clear and stable throughout. At 112 BPM it’s the slowest, and the H/P ratio of 9.23× means percussion is almost entirely absent. The brighter spectral profile and higher ZCR suggest strings or textured harmonic layers rather than piano alone. Named after the Wim Wenders film — wide, open, cinematic.

Onkyō (音響) is a Japanese experimental music movement that emerged in Tokyo in the late 1990s. It centers on extreme restraint — near-silence, micro-sounds, extended pauses, and the acoustic properties of the room itself as compositional material. Less about notes or rhythm, more about the texture of sound and the weight of silence between events. Heavily influenced by reductionism and electro-acoustic music, it blurs the line between performance and listening.

Artists

• Toshimaru Nakamura
• Sachiko M
• Otomo Yoshihide
• Tetuzi Akiyama
• Taku Sugimoto
• Ami Yoshida

“I’m not interested in playing music that has no risk.” — Toshimaru Nakamura