[HN Gopher] Eurorack Knob Idea
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Eurorack Knob Idea
        
       Author : po
       Score  : 214 points
       Date   : 2025-04-25 13:19 UTC (9 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (mitxela.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (mitxela.com)
        
       | itomato wrote:
       | I'm just waiting for the Eurorack Boombox revolution to hit.
        
       | diggan wrote:
       | Interesting idea for sure, but how is the feel of actually
       | turning the knob? Seems to offer short to no resistance, which
       | would make fast but precise movements pretty hard, something that
       | is important for things like performances.
       | 
       | What would be a huge bonus point (but maybe unrealistic? I don't
       | quite understand how the current implementation actually works)
       | would be software-configurable resistance (physical, not
       | electrical). I've spent a lot of time for my DIY modules to find
       | the right knobs, or the right process to adjust the resistance of
       | my existing knobs, being able to control that digitally could
       | introduce a whole new level of fun.
        
         | scottapotamas wrote:
         | You might enjoy https://github.com/scottbez1/smartknob
         | 
         | The complexity of this approach (ignoring the display and
         | flair) unfortunately means you won't see this used too often
         | due to cost.
        
           | diggan wrote:
           | That's so cool on so many levels, and I really enjoyed that
           | indeed, now I have to fight the urge to try to build it
           | myself, good thing it's weekend.
           | 
           | However, it does seem to miss the single most useful feature
           | (for me) which is the resistance part. I understand there is
           | a DC motor controlling the snap points and whatnot, but what
           | I'd like is constant resistance I guess, to a configurable
           | level, rather than snapping to specific points and such.
           | 
           | I don't think it would be possible to hack on top of the
           | already made hardware, but didn't seem like it was already
           | done in the software side of things, although I did skim
           | through things so maybe I missed it.
        
             | pakue wrote:
             | Should be doable to add that. The BLDC needs to add a
             | proportional (or any other function) force against the
             | rotation direction until it reaches 0.
        
               | diggan wrote:
               | Sounds reasonable, wonder how that would actually feel in
               | real life? As far as I understand, this would pass
               | through digital parts, adding a little bit of (maybe
               | noticeable) latency, but I wonder if the latency gets
               | high enough for it to be a bit jarring that the
               | resistance is dynamically changing as you apply torque.
        
               | scottapotamas wrote:
               | This is all fairly normal in robotics, under a subset of
               | (slightly overloaded naming sorry) "impedance control"
        
           | adolph wrote:
           | A differently complex and smaller approach might be to
           | combine the knob with with an axial flux PCB-BLDC, like what
           | Carl Bugeja made [0, 1]. It might be suited to get haptics in
           | something as small as the article's knob, although to get an
           | in-built display you'd have to use one of those displays that
           | fit in lego bricks [2, 3] with a slip-ring.
           | 
           | 0. https://microbots.io/products/motorcell
           | 
           | 1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVszJMlvZcA
           | 
           | 2. https://github.com/AncientJames/uGrey
           | 
           | 3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pUV_3qeHog
        
             | diggan wrote:
             | Many thanks for the links/references. I don't really care
             | about the display itself (probably prefer without it
             | actually), but never saw those other links before,
             | interesting stuff.
        
           | weinzierl wrote:
           | My dream is a piano keyboard with entirely software
           | controlled mechanical key response. Every key individually
           | mounted on a servostepper. As a bonus it could be used as a
           | fake player piano. Or for practice you could make the wrong
           | keys hard to press. Endless possibilities.
        
             | Q6T46nT668w6i3m wrote:
             | Great idea and I'm shocked this doesn't exist.
        
               | robotresearcher wrote:
               | It would likely be very, very expensive.
               | 
               | A compromise that is affordable and does exist is
               | programmable _response_ curves to key velocity and
               | aftertouch pressure. It can make sense to have different
               | curves for eg. piano vs harpsichord even if you can't
               | change the mechanical key impedance.
               | 
               | I haven't seen it in the wild, but using this you could
               | make the wrong notes quieter/louder or even play a
               | different sound. But I think we all know when we play a
               | wrong note, so the utility might be small.
        
               | mrandish wrote:
               | > key velocity and aftertouch pressure.
               | 
               | Just a tangential note to say whenever I see these terms
               | in discussion of MIDI keyboards it reminds me how
               | disappointed I am the vast majority of MIDI controller
               | (and multi-thousand dollar flagship synth) keyboards
               | _still_ don 't fully support per note velocity or
               | polyphonic aftertouch. It's only been 40 years kids...
               | (sigh).
        
             | adamgordonbell wrote:
             | > Or for practice you could make the wrong keys hard to
             | press.
             | 
             | This seems like a pretty cool idea
        
               | tarentel wrote:
               | I'm not convinced it would work very well on making you a
               | better player but who knows. Either way, it sounds like a
               | good way to injure yourself. Piano is a very percussive
               | instrument and if you're hitting the keys with any force
               | and they don't give the way you expect them to I imagine
               | that won't be very great for your joints.
        
             | vhcr wrote:
             | The Yamaha Disklavier has solenoids on every key, so you
             | could disable every key but the one you want by moving them
             | downwards.
             | 
             | It already has a similar feature called SmartKey:
             | https://www.youtube.com/shorts/_Qj33POZCyA
        
         | mrandish wrote:
         | > the right process to adjust the resistance of my existing
         | knobs
         | 
         | I too have "a thing" about the feel of tactile control elements
         | ranging from the tensioning of knobs and joysticks to the
         | dampening on sliders, the force on my emulation arcade cabinet
         | buttons and, of course, the keyswitches, o-rings and lube on my
         | computer mechanical keyboards.
         | 
         | However, I don't really feel a need for software control of the
         | tensioning feel. For example, I have a few different high-end
         | dual-joystick radio control transmitters for RC aircraft. These
         | have fairly pricey hall effect joystick mechanisms and the good
         | ones have a tensioning adjustment for each axis on the bottom.
         | Whether on these RC transmitters, my arcade cabinet or high-end
         | console game controllers I find it's sufficient to simply set
         | the tensioning to my preferences once and I don't feel the need
         | to change it again.
         | 
         | So for the EuroKnob, I agree having no tensioning would be
         | pretty awful - as there's little worse than a floppily loose
         | knob wiggling about - but for me a simple friction-based drag
         | adjustment would be fine.
        
       | bondarchuk wrote:
       | > _It 's a nice dream, of a synthesizer where any knob can be
       | pulled out and replaced with a patch cable, and any jack can have
       | a knob plugged into it to set it to a fixed value._
       | 
       | What's even better, though, is a coupled knob + jack where the
       | knob turns into an attenuator for the input when a cable is
       | plugged in, and works as a standalone knob otherwise. I think
       | this is quite a common design.
       | 
       | I believe I've also seen patch cables with built-in attenuators.
        
         | kennywinker wrote:
         | Another common pattern is jack + offset. The most useful is
         | when you have jack + offset + attenuator... but most modules
         | pick one or the other for space reasons.
        
           | BlandDuck wrote:
           | Totally. Also, an attenuator is easier and cheaper to
           | implement, because it just requires normalizing V+ into the
           | jack plug. An offset requires an adder.
           | 
           | My preference is: attenuator < offset < attenuator + offset.
           | I see no benefit of having to remove the knob to get to the
           | jack as proposed in the article.
        
             | nine_k wrote:
             | The benefit is saving space. Imagine a 10x10 grid of such
             | jack / knob inputs.
        
           | robotresearcher wrote:
           | The attenuator-inverter is super handy too. A gain knob that
           | goes from -1 to +1 X.
        
         | malthaus wrote:
         | the smartest pattern is used in mutable instruments beads, the
         | "attenurandomizers"
         | 
         | it packs a ridiculous amount of functionality into a single
         | plug & knob combo
        
         | enneff wrote:
         | This is why I really like Intellijel's designs. They generally
         | have attenuators on the inputs for which it makes sense, and
         | those attenuators are the small stick knobs. While they use
         | larger knobs for more central module functions.
         | 
         | Eg: https://intellijel.com/downloads/manuals/rubicon_manual.pdf
        
       | Fredkin wrote:
       | Site doesn't load: SSL_ERROR_RX_RECORD_TOO_LONG
        
       | JKCalhoun wrote:
       | It's interesting. I haven't been sucked into the Eurorack thing
       | though -- do people want not just patch cables all over their
       | mixing desk but knobs as well?
       | 
       | Eurorack (and modular synths in general) seem like funny things.
       | Like guitar pedals, I sense there are a lot of enthusiasts that
       | do a lot more tinkering than actually _playing_ them. Watching
       | Rick Beato and guests on YouTube ... seems like a lot of
       | musicians are looking instead for simplicity. Like a few good
       | sounding pedals that, ideally, each have just a knob or two.
       | 
       | Maybe the synth-heads are in a whole different headspace though.
        
         | tym0 wrote:
         | It's somewhat similar to people enjoying developing their game
         | engine more than their game in my experience. Provably why in
         | attracted to it despite having little musical talent :)
        
         | diggan wrote:
         | > It's interesting. I haven't been sucked into the Eurorack
         | thing though -- do people want not just patch cables all over
         | their mixing desk but knobs as well?
         | 
         | I don't personally feel the need of wanting more cables all
         | over my current setup, but sometimes I have had the feeling of
         | "Oh if I could just modulate the VCF Cutoff on my Zen Delay
         | with a patch cable from my modular instead of doing it
         | manually" for some of the desktop units I have next to the
         | modular.
         | 
         | And on the other side, I've also felt the need of having some
         | of the patch holes replaced by knobs, so I could just twist and
         | turn it to evaluate if I want to modulate it, instead of having
         | to actually setup the patch. I could see something like this
         | knob-idea being very useful for that, basically prototyping
         | patches.
         | 
         | > I sense there are a lot of enthusiasts that do a lot more
         | tinkering
         | 
         | This is definitely true, large parts of the community is about
         | tinkering more than making music. But the same is true for
         | programming, large parts of the community is not about problem
         | solving, but coding. That's fine, we all have different
         | motivations :)
         | 
         | What I found really useful (for myself at least) is to try to
         | connect with people who are artists first, who just happen to
         | be using modular synths, rather than finding people tinkering
         | with modular synths who don't actually produce/perform music.
         | 
         | > I haven't been sucked into the Eurorack thing though
         | 
         | Good for you :) A friend pulled me into this dark abyss a month
         | ago. Lots of fun, so many distractions, but lots of fun. Helps
         | that Barcelona (where I live) have a lively community around
         | modular synths as well. It is expensive though, and VCVRack
         | doesn't come close to providing the same experience.
        
           | semi-extrinsic wrote:
           | > And on the other side, I've also felt the need of having
           | some of the patch holes replaced by knobs, so I could just
           | twist and turn it to evaluate if I want to modulate it,
           | instead of having to actually setup the patch.
           | 
           | That could be an interesting spin on this idea. A
           | freestanding PCB with a jack plug on the back and a knob on
           | the front. Turn the knob, and the jack sends CV accordingly.
           | Maybe with a velcro based system to have the PCB stay still
           | while you twiddle the knob.
        
         | bondarchuk wrote:
         | Maybe they are tinkering, but sounds still come out while they
         | are tinkering. So maybe they're playing music after all? The
         | idea that if you're not recording and releasing tracks you're
         | doing it "wrong" is a bit silly IMO. Just strumming a guitar or
         | playing some chords on a piano without recording any of it was
         | always an "acceptable" hobby and not considered "unmusical",
         | playing with synths and sequencers is no different IMO.
        
           | JKCalhoun wrote:
           | You're right. Someone's hobby could be "noodling" -- with a
           | guitar, synth, etc.
        
         | ericwood wrote:
         | > Like a few good sounding pedals that, ideally, each have just
         | a knob or two.
         | 
         | It makes for a nice narrative but I haven't found it holds much
         | water; musicians are all over the place on this spectrum.
         | You'll find both extremes very well represented, and a good
         | chunk of people who compartmentalize their "dayjob" music and
         | tinkering. I've found a lot of successful musicians love to
         | tinker and are always on the search for new inspiration. Like
         | any good craftsperson they take some amount of pride in their
         | tools and I've been blown away by how technical many can get on
         | the electronics side! It's always funny to see Reverb auctions
         | go up for famous musicians and finding out a bassist in a pop
         | punk band owns a bunch of weird synthesizers :)
         | 
         | Simple one to two knob pedals are a big deal but you'll see a
         | very large number of pros touring with extremely complicated
         | modeling setups and all sorts of gadgets. At a certain point
         | you really know what you want, and having the ability to dial
         | that in is important! I tend to gravitate towards simplicity in
         | a band setting but I know a lot of people who want dirt pedals
         | with 10 knobs so they can dial in the sounds they hear in their
         | heads.
        
           | butlike wrote:
           | Your pedal board/modular synth is a reflection of your
           | personality.
        
             | ericwood wrote:
             | Just like real life I have a tidy put together functional
             | board, then a disturbing spaghetti mess tucked away in a
             | corner that few are allowed to see
        
           | robotresearcher wrote:
           | I swing bimodal on this. For a while I enjoy the most exotic
           | modular patches and loaded pedalboard. Then for months I am
           | all about piano and acoustic guitar, as vanilla as can be.
           | 
           | It's all so deep I'm not going run out of fun in any mode.
        
             | ericwood wrote:
             | 100%, there's weeks I just plug straight into an amp
             | because that feels right! At the end of the day it's great
             | to have options.
        
             | tricky wrote:
             | I'm the same on the guitar side. I'll go weeks using a
             | fractal fm9 straight into the PA. it's like playing through
             | a computer which is awesome. however...
             | 
             | I'll get real sick of the complexity and go back to my
             | cranked tube amp and one overdrive pedal.
             | 
             | If I had to choose one, I couldn't.
        
         | butlike wrote:
         | The knobs tend to be the "public API" and the patch cables the
         | wiring up of the functionality to that public API. having a
         | knob for each patch is akin to making every method 'public'
         | instead of protected or private.
        
         | geerlingguy wrote:
         | Watch some episodes of LOOK MUM NO COMPUTER for an example of
         | the kind of tinkering/creativity _some_ people at least love to
         | have available in the physical realm:
         | https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCafxR2HWJRmMfSdyZXvZMTw
         | 
         | A lot of the music is made just playing with different parts of
         | the sound, and having all the controls exposed to be messed
         | with can lead to more creativity.
         | 
         | IMO, kind of like how I enjoy Linux configuration files, in a
         | way, more than I do a GUI that covers up 90% of the guts of an
         | application or server software.
        
         | 2mlWQbCK wrote:
         | My favorite documentary I have not seen (yet), I Dream of Wires
         | from 2013, about modular synthesizers. I know in some trailer
         | there was a maker of modules saying something to the effect
         | that if only people actually making music with their synths
         | bought modules he would be out of business. Can't find that
         | trailer now or I did not watch carefully enough now. There are
         | a few different ones on youtube.
         | 
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQSxqha62j0
        
           | chabes wrote:
           | I'm pretty sure the person who said that quote about non-
           | professional musicians who purchase Eurorack modules was Paul
           | Schreiber, who passed away about a month ago.
           | 
           | Gonna look it up, and I'll edit this post when I find out.
           | 
           | Edit 1: Didn't find the quote from the film yet, but did find
           | [1]this video (unedited interview from I Dream of Wires)
           | where Paul explains how he himself is not a musician, but
           | rather an engineer.
           | 
           | [1] https://youtu.be/6ixv4F4XD4Y
           | 
           | Edit 2: Still haven't found it.
           | 
           | I have the film at home, but I'm traveling in Europe at the
           | moment, so it is out of reach for me currently.
        
         | m_kos wrote:
         | Don't get sucked into modular hardware synths. They are TONS of
         | fun, but it is a very expensive hobby. Monotrail Tech Talk has
         | a few excellent videos on YouTube, but he must have spent a
         | fortune on his gear.
        
         | kgwxd wrote:
         | I got sucked into it a little over a year ago, it's starting to
         | wear a bit thin for me already though.
         | 
         | > I sense there are a lot of enthusiasts that do a lot more
         | tinkering than actually playing them
         | 
         | It's called "sound design" :) Can't start on a song until the
         | timbre of my never-quite-done-this-way-before saw tooth bass is
         | juuuuuuust right.
        
         | malthaus wrote:
         | i'm happy someone is considering new physical ideas/approaches
         | at least as i find the trend in recent years of basically
         | putting full "computers" into eurorack modules ridiculous. not
         | just raspberry pi's behind a eurorack plate but with full
         | configurability / user interfaces.
         | 
         | the release of the 4ms meta module was when i decided to be
         | happy with what i have because it's becoming an unironic
         | misguided circlejerk of sorts
        
         | c0nsumer wrote:
         | For me I pretty quickly realized that I like synths to make
         | sounds, or maybe a bit of programming (with wires!) to make an
         | electronic music box.
         | 
         | But making songs? Just not for me... And that's a whole
         | different thing.
        
         | mrandish wrote:
         | > I haven't been sucked into the Eurorack thing though
         | 
         | I'm the same. I love playing around with making electronic
         | music on a hobby level and I find the idea and look of modular
         | synths appealing - and I'm also a pushover for most retro
         | things, especially those with cool knobs and blinkenlights.
         | However, if I'm honest, I don't really enjoy creating music
         | with modular or vintage analog "knobby" synths. I haven't ever
         | bought a modular rig and my vintage analog synths are lovingly
         | packed away with my numerous retro Amiga, Atari and Commodore
         | computers where they wait to be enjoyed in limited doses on
         | special occasions.
         | 
         | So, to address your implied question, IMHO I don't think people
         | like us are somehow "missing" something deep and great in
         | modular synths. To me, the essence of the modular appeal is
         | three things: 1) tactile feedback that's responsively
         | immediate, 2) a set of compatible 'lego block' components which
         | can be combined in creative ways, and 3) An element of
         | randomness from the combined interactions on analog components.
         | 
         | While modular rigs offer all three of those things, having
         | those three together doesn't require analog hardware or a
         | dedicated modular rig. I think I can get a very similar
         | creative feeling and joy of discovery (plus a smidge of
         | randomness) from the right combination of high-quality MIDI
         | control surfaces and a well-chosen set of synth plug-ins
         | running on a computer. To be sure, some MIDI control surfaces
         | are crap and not all synth plug-ins enable creative
         | experimentation deep enough and easy enough to 'scratch that
         | itch'. But, then again, it's possible to assemble an ill-
         | conceived modular rig out of poor quality components that also
         | fails to inspire creativity. While finding that unique balance
         | of factors sufficient to trigger creative serendipity isn't
         | trivial with either analog hardware or digital MIDI + plug-ins,
         | to me the advantages of digital in cost, size, speed,
         | repeatability and flexibility win out.
         | 
         | I guess it's possible there's some other essential element
         | which analog modular rigs provide that I'm missing out on but
         | if so, I haven't been able to discover what it is.
        
         | enneff wrote:
         | There's definitely a thing in music, as in computing, or
         | golfing, or whatever, where some people are more into the gear
         | than the actual practice of doing the thing. Modular synths are
         | a great outlet for those kinds of people.
         | 
         | I have a modest Eurorack setup and a few other synths and I
         | find them a nice way to get into music making without looking
         | at a computer. It's nice to have a limited set of options,
         | rather than a near infinite set of software plugins and
         | presets. My gear can only make a certain number of sounds at
         | once, and that's it. The liberty of constraints.
         | 
         | When I get serious about a music project I inevitably end up
         | working in a computer DAW but I often don't find that an
         | inspiring place to start.
        
       | dylan604 wrote:
       | "It's a beautiful dream - a very expensive, but beautiful dream."
       | 
       | While that might be true, what is expensive for me is chump
       | change for someone else. However, that is very difficult to grok
       | as there was no prices mentioned anywhere that I could see. Sure,
       | it'll be expensive to me because I have to ask. But I also know
       | that I cannot afford a fully spec'd out MacPro, but at least I
       | can see the numbers.
        
       | buescher wrote:
       | This is so cool and so clever I'm in awe, really. I'm grinning
       | from ear to ear looking at this and jealous I didn't think of it.
       | But the problem it solves is not quite one that anyone has. What
       | does it offer over a built-in knob with a jack that overrides it
       | beside compactness? A knob that's not designed for feel that you
       | can misplace?
       | 
       | There's a miniature case study in thinking about innovation here.
       | This is what the germ of a really neat idea looks like but you
       | have to keep going and that's hard.
        
         | CamperBob2 wrote:
         | As he mentions in the video, the whole motivation is
         | compactness. When your panel looks like
         | https://learningmodular.com/the-eurorack-expansion-project/ ,
         | every mm^2 matters.
         | 
         | I'd be tempted to eliminate the patch cord altogether by using
         | one of those pushbutton pots. Normally it would act like a
         | traditional pot, but if you push it, it would go into a mode
         | where you could choose from a variety of nearby inputs
         | wirelessly.
         | 
         | The LEDs next to the pot would need to be an OLED display that
         | indicates the selected input. Some form of extremely
         | lightweight mesh network for control connections would need to
         | exist, something with very low bandwidth and short range but
         | also low latency. After 5 or 10 years' worth of tinkering, it
         | might actually synthesize some sounds.
        
           | buescher wrote:
           | Right - it solves the compactness problem but introduces new
           | ones. That said, from what I've seen of other people's
           | modular setups, keeping them from growing without bound does
           | not seem to be the highest priority in that world.
           | 
           | I'd also have to wonder how well a jack would hold up under
           | regular use as a bushing. It's very common for engineers with
           | little exposure to the connector industry (not my background
           | either, but I read the data sheets and app notes) to
           | underestimate how highly engineered and optimized for their
           | use case even decades-old connector types are.
           | 
           | It would be nice to have something like the NKK display
           | pushbuttons in the knob for a rotary encoder/pushbutton.
           | 
           | >After 5 or 10 years' worth of tinkering, it might actually
           | synthesize some sounds.
           | 
           | Yeah.
        
       | spankalee wrote:
       | Wouldn't it be more universally compatible to have a powered knob
       | that outputs a adjustable constant control voltage? You'd
       | probably want trim adjustments on it too.
       | 
       | Yes, there'd be an extra wire to the power supply module, but
       | that seems fine for a modular.
        
         | diggan wrote:
         | > Yes, there'd be an extra wire to the power supply module, but
         | that seems fine for a modular.
         | 
         | Maybe other's modular synths look/work differently than mine,
         | but when all the panels are installed, there is no way to pull
         | a cable from underneath the panels/inside the case to the
         | outside, without drilling new holes through some panel or the
         | sides of the case. So not sure how you'd pull a cable from the
         | power supply to the front side of a panel when it's closed like
         | that. My case is a Intellijel Palette 104HP, maybe other cases
         | expose the power supply to the outside?
        
         | tpm wrote:
         | Yes, but there are already many of these in modular form
         | (usually attenuators normalled to +5V in the absence of input
         | voltage or just fader modules without inputs). This is new :)
        
       | arnorhs wrote:
       | This looks super neat and probably a fun project to build.
       | 
       | > It's a nice dream, of a synthesizer where any knob can be
       | pulled out and replaced with a patch cable, and any jack can have
       | a knob plugged into it to set it to a fixed value. Whether it's
       | actually practical to build a synth like this I'm unsure. It
       | would probably only be worthwhile if you applied it to every
       | single control on the modular, which rules out using other
       | people's modules. You would have to invest heavily into the
       | Eurorack Knob Idea. You couldn't even port other modules that
       | easily, as many of them would expect a real potentiometer,
       | whereas the encoder can only produce a voltage. Coupling it with
       | a voltage-controlled potentiometer would work, but would be even
       | more expensive.
       | 
       | Yeah, it's hard to imagine this fitting in nicely to everything
       | since it's defintely more effort and work than just having a knob
       | and a jack for the control of a particular thing. Esp. since most
       | of the time, as a convention, you'll have a knob that controls
       | the value, but when a jack is plugged in, this same knob acts as
       | the attenuator for the signal.
       | 
       | I would have appreciated having an image or a pdf of the
       | schematic for the design to understand it properly - i can get it
       | from your github but I don't have kicad installed on this
       | computer.
       | 
       | I'm esp. interested in the normalized behavior - ie. when you
       | have a signal plugged in to the jack that is _not_ the
       | potentiometer.. does it get passed through or does it have to go
       | through this chip as well?
       | 
       | Having to supply a 3V to this to make it work as well is also an
       | extra requirement of its usefulness in normal eurorack circuits -
       | not a total dealbreaker but that does add extra requirements, and
       | extra components to one's design.
       | 
       | Anyways... really cool idea :)
        
       | joemi wrote:
       | It's an interesting idea (truly a clever way to accomplish
       | this!), but I think it's addressing the symptom, not the problem.
       | The symptom is that some jacks don't have associated knobs. The
       | problem is that either the module designer or the module user is
       | overly obsessed with miniaturization. The designer is at fault if
       | it's a parameter that really should have had a knob with the jack
       | and they avoided including one in order to keep things small. The
       | user is at fault if they're trying to stay so space-constrained
       | that they can't fit a module that outputs an DC voltage set by a
       | knob into their case. There are numerous modules that do this
       | (and often that attenuvert as well) and many of them are fairly
       | small too.
        
       | jimbokun wrote:
       | I liked the video focused on his hands, where his gestures and
       | expressing the rough size and orientation of things added to his
       | verbal description. Not sure if this is a common technique, but
       | works very well for this topic.
        
         | Gracana wrote:
         | This Old Tony (a hobby machinist / welder on youtube) has made
         | all of his videos in that format. It works very well!
         | 
         | https://www.youtube.com/c/thisoldtony/videos
        
       | moebrowne wrote:
       | Anyone know what is being used to render the git repo for this?
       | https://git.mitxela.com/euroknob
        
         | devinvs wrote:
         | looks like it's this: https://git.mitxela.com/web-git-sum
        
       | butlike wrote:
       | Fantastic idea except for the proprietary 3.5" knob. From the
       | video it appears the magnet is required to discern position.
        
       | alnwlsn wrote:
       | > any jack can have a knob plugged into it to set it to a fixed
       | value.
       | 
       | I'm kind of surprised he didn't start with a knob with a tiny
       | accelerometer, mcu and battery in it to produce some sort of
       | output signal into a stock plug depending on how the knob is
       | oriented with respect to gravity.
       | 
       | Putting electronics inside the plug is nearly a mitxela
       | trademark. https://mitxela.com/projects/flash_synth
        
         | pea wrote:
         | I was wondering this - I'd buy this if I could just plug it
         | into my existing sockets. I'm pretty sure you could get 50-100
         | hrs with a battery, but I wonder if you could have something
         | that you wind-up like a mechanical watch.
        
         | naikrovek wrote:
         | Probably because pulling on cords can twist them. That's what I
         | thought when this occurred to me.
        
         | sigy wrote:
         | Profit margins on eurorack are pretty damn low. And you need a
         | lot of knobs and jacks and plugs. Even a hall effect sensor may
         | be out of the sweet spot for cost.
        
       | m_kos wrote:
       | 1. I find Tim's work always so impressive and humbling. Compared
       | to software, hardware projects seem infinitely more complex.
       | 
       | 2. Speaking of knobs, I am writing a toy software synth for
       | smartphones. Are there any design guidelines for mobile UI for
       | audio? Knobs are hard to use and sliders take up a lot of space
       | with only a little more precision. I experimented with curved
       | sliders (inverted parabola or sine), but they are confusing since
       | height doesn't really encode anything and the curvature is there
       | only to make the slider longer. I didn't find any design systems
       | focused on audio components.
        
         | ecolonsmak wrote:
         | Knobs shouldn't be hard to use - hold down the knob that needs
         | the adjustment and then drag in either of two directions to set
         | the value. Maybe have a pop-up over the knob that displays the
         | value as it's in use.
        
           | recursive wrote:
           | Loopy Pro has a cool convention that I haven't seen elsewhere
           | for this. Drag up or down to change the knob value. While
           | doing that, drag left or right to zoom in. That makes the
           | up/down movement more precise.
        
             | m_kos wrote:
             | I will look into it! Is this for mobile or desktop? I would
             | like to see how they introduce this interaction pattern and
             | what feedback they provide as you interact with the knob.
        
               | recursive wrote:
               | It's an ios app. IMO it's really good. I own exactly one
               | apple product, and it's an iPad that only runs Loopy Pro.
               | 
               | Here's a section from the manual that loosely explains
               | the concept[1]:
               | 
               | > Adjust a slider or dial's value by dragging up and
               | down, or left and right for horizontal sliders. For finer
               | control, move your finger away from the dial.
               | 
               | [1]: https://loopypro.com/manual/#sliders-and-dials
        
               | m_kos wrote:
               | Thanks! This link is really great!
               | 
               | My only Apple product is also an iPad, and I mostly use
               | it to make music with Auxy Studio:)
               | 
               | Do you use any fun apps on Android? Currently, my
               | favorite apps are Digitron and Nanoloop. (No affiliation,
               | but Digitron's upgrade was gifted to me.)
        
               | recursive wrote:
               | The only other music or audio app I use with any
               | regularity is Reaper on Windows. I tend to do more
               | performance-oriented stuff, and I try to keep everything
               | outside the computer as much as practical. I don't use
               | any software synths. I like the constraints and UX of
               | dialing patches into my one keyboard/drum machine. I
               | record some, but mainly I like to play in real time and
               | not fiddle with VSTs and plugins.
        
           | m_kos wrote:
           | Thanks! For me, this works well for knobs that don't require
           | frequent adjustments. Currently, my knobs have little pills
           | next to them that switch a knob to a "precision mode." It is
           | a little quicker, but you may need to remember to disable
           | this mode next time you use the knob.
           | 
           | I also played with the idea of letting users slide their
           | finger off a knob (tap and slide away from the center). This
           | allows for moving the finger over a longer circumference,
           | hence enabling a great degree of precision. The problems with
           | this approach are that it takes longer to operate such knobs,
           | you need to communicate to the user what the max allowable
           | distance from the knob is, it can interfere with scrolling,
           | and it doesn't work for knobs close to the edge of the
           | screen. (Your idea works well for knobs at the edges.)
           | 
           | And this is just knobs! There are many other components,
           | interactions between them, as well as associated
           | accessibility challenges, haptics, etc. Instead of
           | reinventing the wheel, I was hoping that human factors people
           | had developed relevant guidelines, but perhaps it simply is
           | not a prevalent enough problem.
        
       | atoav wrote:
       | As a fellow Eurorack circuit designer and university teacher on
       | thst issue one immidiate issue I can see is one of practicality.
       | Decent potentiometers are maybe a Euro per piece if bought in
       | bulk, they have a start and an end which is nice and for analog
       | gear you have direct control over the parameter, with very clear
       | feedback what is going on -- _that is the main reason people want
       | physical gear_. So add in a LED ring for visual feedback and
       | endstops.. Might be nice for a digital module.
       | 
       | But even then I'd wonder if it worth it, because of the high pcb
       | space usage. With potentiometers as attenuators or attenuverters
       | you can fit two pots next to each other in a space of 20mm which
       | neatly aligns with the standard panel widths. Theoretically you
       | could certainly get smaller with thst solution, but the hall
       | effect IC needs to be accounted for as well. With existing pots I
       | can use the space underneath. If your module is just 10mm wide
       | that space is pretty premium..
        
       | csours wrote:
       | Ok, but why stop here? You've effectively created a rotary
       | potentiometer in one dimension, you could add two more dimensions
       | like an analog thumbstick on a game controller. Do any
       | controllers have a twistable thumbstick?
       | 
       | Also, like other commentors have stated - this could be a jack
       | too, so you could have a jack knob analog stick.
       | 
       | BUT WHY STOP THERE?
       | 
       | You could mount it on a linear pot/slider.
       | 
       | BUT WHY STOP THERE?! (help me)
       | 
       | You could daisy chain pluggable rotary analog stick jack
       | stacks...
       | 
       | ----
       | 
       | The madness has taken him
        
         | tpm wrote:
         | There are several 'joystick' controller modules (Doepfer
         | a-174-4 or Intellijel Planar come to mind) and the Doepfer also
         | produces 3rd signal by twisting the knob.
        
         | mrandish wrote:
         | > Do any controllers have a twistable thumbstick?
         | 
         | Yes, several. For example, the main knob on the Komplete
         | Kontrol S-series MIDI controllers (https://www.native-
         | instruments.com/en/products/komplete/keyb...) combines a rotary
         | encoder with four axis directional input, a push button and an
         | LED indicator ring. I have an S61 and the implementation of the
         | knob is delightfully intuitive, responsive and functional. To
         | be clear, this implementation is not a joystick on a ball base
         | with twistable knob, it's a flush-mounted knob that can be
         | slightly nudged up, down, left or right with a single,
         | satisfying click in each direction. I'd recommend trying it
         | yourself, if only there were still any music stores that put a
         | range of high-end midi controller keyboards out where customers
         | could, you know, touch them.
         | 
         | I actually came here to suggest the same idea for the EuroKnob.
         | The four axis directional input is basically a D-Pad module
         | commonly used in game controllers. I find this kind of rotary
         | knob + directional input control to be very effective. However,
         | there's one critical caveat. It's apparently possible to
         | implement this kind of control poorly because I've also seen a
         | couple devices where the implementation is as bad as the S61's
         | is great. It probably just requires a certain degree of
         | engineering finesse to nail a good combination of
         | responsiveness and tactile feedback.
         | 
         | > You could mount it on a linear pot/slider.
         | 
         | As much as I like and agree with your first thought, I've
         | actually seen the idea of a rotary knob combined with a linear
         | slider - although it's extremely rare. Having touched one
         | myself I can confirm the reason it's rare is that it's not
         | _just_ bad - it 's _uniquely_ bad. By which I mean the
         | combination of two controls which each work so well on their
         | own into one combined control, is unexpectedly awful. I was
         | unfortunate enough to try one first-hand (so to speak) at a
         | tiny booth buried in the back of some long-forgotten NAMM show
         | in the days when Cubase was still being demoed on an Atari ST.
         | There was a bespoke mixer from a company I 'd never heard of
         | with rotary knobs on their mixer's sliders. I'm pretty sure
         | when I tried to adjust the two parameters at the same time I
         | may have reflexively pulled my hand back and uttered "Ugh!"
         | 
         | Usually I'm polite when trying out some novel interface idea
         | but there must be something 'special' about trying to combine
         | two very precise but divergent proportional motions on two
         | different arm joins (wrist & elbow) at the same time that's
         | deeply unnatural. It felt so weirdly wrong that I suspect some
         | human factors kinesiologist has probably written an award-
         | winning paper about how humans evolved to never, _ever_ do
         | this. But hey, one out of two ideas is still a great day! :-)
        
           | csours wrote:
           | Thank you for taking my lunatic ravings semi-seriously!
        
         | moffkalast wrote:
         | Sanity wants you to stop? Just say no, sanity legally cannot
         | stop you without your consent.
        
         | m463 wrote:
         | reminds me of The Parable of the King's Toaster...
         | 
         | it ends with:
         | 
         |  _The king wisely had the engineer beheaded, and they all lived
         | happily ever._
        
       | dimal wrote:
       | I like it, but the best modules already have knobs and jacks for
       | everything. When you have CV going into the jack, the knob acts
       | as an attenuator or attenuverter. This means that the modules are
       | generally larger. Make Noise generally does this and their
       | modules are consistently bigger than everyone else, and they're
       | also some of the most popular. Look at Maths. It's a slope
       | generator and a mixer. It's fucking huge. But everyone has it
       | because it's patch programmable. The problem in Eurorack is
       | instead of making things patch programmable, they try to fit in a
       | ton of functionality into a small space, so you have a lot of
       | modules that have multiple modes where buttons and knobs all have
       | different meanings depending on what "page" you're on. Fuck that.
       | Almost every time I try a module like that, I end up selling it.
       | 
       | He's right about the interface being the point of Eurorack.
       | Plugging things into other things is the whole point. When I have
       | a module that has hidden state, I forget what state it's in or
       | what the knobs mean. I end up avoiding those modules. With cables
       | and knobs, I can _see_ the state of the whole system. I need good
       | cable management to make sure it 's not spaghetti, but I already
       | do that in code already, and it's not that different.
        
       | smj-edison wrote:
       | Tangential idea, but I've wondered if it would be possible to
       | make synthesizers a lot cheaper by only having a couple rotary
       | encoders. You could have hundreds of parameters on the panel, but
       | each parameter would just be a neopixel LED and button. You could
       | link the rotary encoder with a parameter by pressing it and the
       | parameters' button at the same time. Certainly not as nice as a
       | dedicated knob for each, but you'd also get an interface that is
       | ~$40 instead of ~$600...
        
         | mdpye wrote:
         | There are loads of systems where every button and encoder has
         | many functions, with modal or paged interfaces. But I'm trying
         | to stick to a model of no hidden or ephemeral state with my
         | modular, just for fun, I guess. Mostly analogue, so no non-
         | volatile memory to store settings, the positions of the patches
         | and knobs set everything, and the test is that if I power it
         | down and back up it must come back doing what it was doing when
         | the power went out (very long cycle lfos notwithstanding!)
         | 
         | When a laptop can simulate anything, the physicality of the
         | interface is most of the attraction, so might as well go all
         | the way...
        
           | smj-edison wrote:
           | For sure! The interface is the most important part these days
           | when practically everything can be emulated.
           | 
           | In my design, I wouldn't say the state is hidden though--
           | that's the point of having an indicator light with every
           | parameter. The LED becomes the state visualization. So,
           | write-wise, yes, it's overloaded, but read-wise it's not.
           | 
           | I'm just now realizing I didn't explain that well in the OP,
           | lol. And really this is more of a budget-friendly approach,
           | rather than a user-friendly approach. I'm trying to meet
           | those half way...
        
         | sigy wrote:
         | The physical interface is an intrinsic part of the design of
         | any eurorack module, including artistic elements. If you
         | actually use these, then you quickly tire of menu diving for
         | simple options, and only modules that do very particular things
         | make it worth the bother. For everything else, the layout must
         | be accessible, memorable, understandable, and not too crowded.
         | And it helps if the visual of the thing conjures up memories of
         | how it sounds or what it does.
        
       | d--b wrote:
       | It's like real life functional programming.
       | 
       | Can't wait for the y-combinator module.
        
       | fitsumbelay wrote:
       | E        W
       | 
       | A                        E           M        O     S
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-04-25 23:00 UTC)