Q1.Is it possible to send an LFO from Peaks into a pitch quantiser, like THIS, would doing that give me a quantised scale?

I am a total newby to these things so please excuse my ignorance!


Why though?
You will get a quantized scale going up and down all the time, which I at least don’t find that interesting of a concept.

But in theory yes, in practice probably not so much - from the manual, under specifications(specifically mentioning LFO speed) :"…0.03 Hz to 160 Hz".

So you would get a lot of nothing, then some rumbly tones, more rumbly bottom end tones, slightly higher rumble, a bit of bass, and then go back down again. That is, assuming that your system can reproduce those frequencies - So your oscillator needs to go that low, and your speakers would need to be able to follow the oscillator downward. Ultimately not really worth it in my humble opinion, since a good portion of the LFO sweep will be below what speakers can reproduce, and while you could tune the oscillator up, I don’t know how the quantizer will react to being fed such low frequencies.

Forgive me if I missed something, or didn’t consider a cool usage scenario, it’s kinda late here… :confused:

You should consider the Volt output range of Peaks rather than it’s LFO speed since oscillators usually take V/Oct. I’m not sure exactly what Peaks output range is but I’m sure it will be musicially useful. If you set peaks to the random waveform and put that through a quantizer into a VCO you will get some nice results that aren’t simply a scale going up and down.

> I don’t know how the quantizer will react to being fed such low frequencies.

Well, it will react by quantizing (to the scale selected) whatever DC voltage level (within specs) it sees at its input. (As bonobo notes above). That’s the point of a quantizer. You can feed it anything you like, LFOs, envelopes, etc, from Peaks or any other suitable module. Bonus point in this case of course is that it works as a 3-stage “analogue” shift register, which has very neat/classical usage scenarios (“Arabesques”). (And famously deployed here: )

ubiubu - I was hoping it would just take it, but I’ve seen some that only do certain octaves, therefore the question :slight_smile:

@bonobo - My point was(rather poorly explained) that since the max frequency of peaks is still rather low, the musical tones it should be equivalent to are still very low. A bit of research on note frequencies leads me to believe my brain frizzed yesterday, my apologies.

Yes, it will work, up to around D3# :slight_smile:
If you can tune whatever oscillator you select, you could get even higher notes, so please disregard my post, and carry on :slight_smile:

V’cent: I can’t follow your explanation. A quantizer quantizes voltages, not frequencies. The output of a quantizer is a signal with the same frequency as the original, but with voltages quantized to a specific scales. It’s much simpler that something that messes with the frequency of the signal (and which would then be some kind of auto-tune).

With the right amplitude attenuation (the “Tap” modes which have an amplitude control!), or through an attenuator, Peaks can be sent to a quantizer to get melodies.

  • The frequency of Peaks’ LFO will set the tempo.
  • The waveshape of Peaks’ will set the melodic pattern (sawtooth = going up the scale, triangle = back and forth, random…)
  • The amplitude will set the range of the melody (how many octaves it spans).

plus, a quantizer that also sends out trigger signals whenever a new step on its scale is reached, like doepfer a156, can also be used to generate repetitive rhythmic patterns when fed with an lfo…

If you use the Penrose you can trigger the quantisation with a sequencer, if you time the LFO and the sequencer correctly, this can yield some interesting melodic results, where the scale does not just go up and down but is more like an ever evolving sequence.

Thanks for the help, so to clarify, I could send a random LFO to the quantiser and the output of the quantiser to the Voltage input of a sound source, like Braids or Clouds, and that would give me a random, yet meaningful pitch/scale?

If this is the case, I know what my next moduel is going to be :smiley:

Yes, but…

If the output of the random LFO spans 10V, this will mean that the resulting random notes will span 10 octaves! You really need to attenuate the level of the LFO. Peaks has an amplitude control when the LFO is set in tap tempo mode (in place of the frequency control). Otherwise, you’ll need to stick an attenuator between the LFO and the quantizer.

Got it, thank you very much for you help pichenettes!

on its way

I hope that’ll do the job!

It will do, though I would have recommended an A-183-2. (edit. Nevermind, in this case A-183-1 be ok in as much the Quantimator has an offset onboard, sort of (“transpose”). But not all of them do; uScale, doesn’t for example).

Thanks ubiubu, I can always ammend the order :slight_smile: Do you rate the Quantimatter above the uScale?

Well, difficult to say. Both will cover the basic quantization duties, I guess, but they’re also two different things. Technically speaking, uScale II perhaps might be considered somewhat superior, in that it uses a fancier D/A converter, but that’s not something that necessarily translates into superiority in practice (well, I’d say). It’s mostly a UI/concept question. Personally, I like the ASR stuff that comes with the Quantimator, but not so much the scale-select interface. I.e. turning a knob and being told this now is scale “A” or “8” or “4”; for control over scales, I prefer uScale (or I guess Penrose would be similar or the TipTop thing (if it ever …?))

Penrose has a trigger input for quantising, and sends out a gate when the input voltage changes.

The uScale doesn’t do either of these things, but does have dual note CV outputs, and a few other functions I haven’t tried yet on mine.


Thanks again, I guess I will decide on the day when I am ready to buy either of the modules; I was hedging towards the Quantimatter, but only because my favourite modular synth artist uses one. This guy

I will go and investigate the Penrose now :smiley:

Okay, the Penrose looks nifty, and as a kit I imagine it will be considerably cheaper than either of the quantisers I was looking at. The only slight drawback is that it is a kit! Check my older posts about the Shruthi and you might gather I am useless at building electronic stuff :slight_smile: (I wonder how much someone would charge to build it for me?)

Be aware that the uScale accepts only positive CV, whereas Peaks’ LFO are bipolar. I found this slightly annoying at times.