Clouds Successor


Is there any ETA on Clouds II?


@TheSlowGrowth sorry for the late reply. Fascinating stuff. Will look at the resources you linked to :slight_smile:


No, there is no ETA because error bars are +/- 10 months.


What are error bars?


“Error bars” is another way of saying “uncertainty”. i would assume that in this case Olivier is referring to supply chain uncertainty for parts.


Or just life uncertainy.


Error bars is a term from statistics, kind of like confidence interval. ±10 months means the ETA could change as much as 20 months. That’s a pretty wide range of time, indicating low confidence, so there’s no sense in setting an ETA.

Forgive us for being regular nerds, instead of just synth nerds. hah


Nah - I bet its released by the end of the month, if not then, certainly Nov :slight_smile:


I was very interested in BAM for an external end of chain reverb, but after reading this chain, I’m having my doubts. I’ll jump on the Clouds successor the instant it’s released, but don’t like using Clouds for that duty; it’s too interesting in its other functions. What’s a recommended end of chain reverb? Desktop or eurorack? Strymon products sound too clean to me. Anything a little grittier that accepts stereo line level signals?


What’s your problem with BAM?


I have nothing against BAM; I want one! I was only curious if others had alternative opinions. Someone above had mentioned the price point is what is for the hardware rather than the processor and algorithms within.


Hi all .

I don’t even have a case and I want the Clouds .
I can’t believe i missed the first one.

Hope you can find a similar chip so that people can get this sort of effect .


Please remember that Clouds is an open source and hardware project, so you can build it by yourself or find someone that build for you.

You can find lot of good builders on Modular Grid. I bought a DIY version of Clouds called uClouds that takes even less HP space.


I would wait until Clouds Mk2 arrives. You may just regret buying the “old” version. While it sounds great, Olivier is right that the UI has some limitations. Don’t get me wrong, its still really, really good, but Coulds mk2 is probably even better.


Pardon me if this is too much out of context. Thinking about Clouds V2 has made many questions pop up in my head lately, and I wanted to lay them out here. I’ve tried googling a bit, but I didn’t find a clear answer so I thought I’d ask here.

Could someone clarify a little bit the two paradigmatic schools of granular synthesis, namely Xenakis’ and Roads’? I have read Olivier write that he aims for a Xenakis approach rather than a Roads one (which is covered by modules like Morphagene, Nebulae and g0), but I can’t find a clear distinction between them. Both are tape based, and both go into the realm of microsound. It seems that the Clouds approach is to build dense textures with lots of simultaneous grains, and the Morphagene approach is more like creating very small tape loops. Is this just a matter of grain polyphony, where Clouds obviously dominates all the other modules? Does randomization play a role in how a module like Clouds is meant to be used? Was it intentional to limit the buffer of Clouds to 1s by default? I tend to gravitate towards Morphagene much more, because it fits how I think about sound on tape. But it’s entirely possible that there are things about Clouds that I don’t fully understand and that would make me like it more, and maybe buy the V2.

Sorry for the long post :slight_smile:


Clouds mkI:

  • ZERO connection with tape music.
  • Polyphony is absolutely essential.
  • Short buffer because that’s what onboard RAM allowed. External RAM access was too slow for the target polyphony.
  • More thoughts on buffer size: a knob can address at most 100 things. Rich audio changes at 20 things per second. Above 5s and a pot no longer makes sense to explore a buffer.
  • Record a little something and create a mass of it (eg: rain from a buffer containing the sound of a drop of water).
  • Xenakis: create a mass of a sound by stacking variations of a single timbre (could be a computer-generated sine-wave, could be a violin in a large orchestra). Play with dispersion in envelope, space, amplitude, and pitch.
  • Dispersion parameters could either be random (attenuated random) or structured (eg: feed a fast sequence in Clouds’ V/O input to create chords).
  • Link with reverbs: reverb is a cloud of reflections randomized in time, pan, timbre.


And a more general note about “Clouds 2”, at the risk of repeating myself…

It’s certainly not a case of reworking my draft again and again to make something absolutely amazing, postponing the release to add yet another feature.

It’s not released yet because I’m not actively working on it at the moment.

So don’t interpret this delay as a promise of something absolutely mind-blowing. It’ll be a well-crafted little thing that does its job very well. Consider how Braids evolved into Plaits.


I believe this is exactly (or at least one of the big reasons) why people, including me, are hyped about Clouds’ successor.


That is precisely what I’m saving 14hp for in my planned rack expansion. Speaking only for myself, I’m in no hurry, but simply aware that I will have many very happy days of exploration and delight once it arrives.


Interesting questions! I can only can speak for Morphagene and g0. Personally I didn’t like Morphagene because it either produces harsh, stuttering sounds (gaps between the grains) or very smeary, fuzzy sounds (lots of of overlapping grains). I sold Morphagene and bought a second hand g0 und like it way better. As far as I know the g0 only plays one grain after another (or if not, there’s only a tiny fade/overlap). The result sounds super smooth and crispy, really unique and outstanding.

I also have a (Micro) Clouds 1, but here I like the result of playing back “clouds” of grains much better than in the Morphagene. Nevertheless I’m also looking forward to the Clouds successor…