Understanding Bazille

[Howard]

BTW u-he user guides are included with the installers, and are immediately available by clicking on the u-he 'badge' in each plug-in.

[Blogbert]

I didn't say anything instant gratification. This seems an unecessarily pointed remark

I agree with you. You seem to want the manual to make sense for someone without much prior knowledge. That has nothing to do with seeking instant gratification.

Parts of Bazille's manual do not seem to have been written for people with no prior knowledge. For example, compare the sections on Mapping Generators between the manuals of Bazille vs ACE. The ACE manual contains explanations of the difference between "smooth" and "quantized" mapping, as well as explanations of "key" and "increment". These sections helped me to wrap my head around what the Mapping Generator does and how it works. The explanations of these features are shorter in Bazille's manual, and in my own personal experience, they are less helpful for figuring out the Mapping Generators. I don't know why the manual for Bazille contains less explanation... I always figured it was written for people who have already read the ACE manual.

The manual is not particularly well-written for novices. Certainly, if you try harder, you might figure it out. But, that doesn't mean the manual has no room for improvement, and I'm quite surprised that Howard is implying otherwise. Perhaps the authors of the document forget what it is like not to know all about this stuff? Anyway, I'm not posting just to criticize -- if the authors would like assistance identifying difficult parts of the manual, I would be happy to help. I don't see any downside to adding extra explanation to the manual in response to people finding it hard to understand (it's not like implementing other feature requests).

This may be an amazing synth, but I think it's probably too complex for me (YMMV) and I can't really jsutify buying something like this without being able to get the most out of it.

I don't think the synth is particularly complex. Actually, I think it is LESS complex to use than most other (highly tweakable) synths. It just has a bit of a learning curve.

Many other synths use a mod matrix for modulation. This, in my opinion, requires lots more conscious mental exertion than patching modulation with Bazille. With a mod matrix, you have to be constantly thinking about what you want to connect, and selecting it from a list of words. With Bazille, there is no need to select sources and destinations from a list -- you just drag cables where you want them. It creates a jumble of cables, which looks complex, but in my view, the process of connecting modules is much simpler and more intuitive than using a mod matrix.

[ghostwhistler]

That may well be the case...once you understand how it works. I don't think it's as complex as it appears either. But there are elements in the design that ar, imo, oblique. I don't think explaining them is unreasonable to expect

[ghostwhistler]

So I decided to pick this up as it is pretty incredible.

It'll take time to figure out, but I don't think it is desperately decipherable. However, the sequencer layout is kinda weird.

Does each of the inputs (the connection points along the top) pertain to a separate instance of the sequencer? IE, can i only set 4 sequencer points per source? For example, if I want to modulate the cutoff on filter 1, do i connect, eg, the first point, and use those sequences?

How does the dial work? I can't wrap my head around that at all. It seems to allow modulation between each of the sequencer inputs, but I can't figure out how it works.

[pierb]

Many other synths use a mod matrix for modulation. This, in my opinion, requires lots more conscious mental exertion than patching modulation with Bazille. With a mod matrix, you have to be constantly thinking about what you want to connect, and selecting it from a list of words. With Bazille, there is no need to select sources and destinations from a list -- you just drag cables where you want them. It creates a jumble of cables, which looks complex, but in my view, the process of connecting modules is much simpler and more intuitive than using a mod matrix.

I kinda agree that patching cables feels more natural, while you're doing it, but it makes a patch much more complex to understand. Give me a matrix any day.

I wish Bazille had an alternative UI. Same modules, same DSP, but more similar to Zebra.

Or maybe Zebra 3 will have better audio rate modulation features

[ghostwhistler]

Can you self modulate? Like a synclavier (I assume) does?

[Blogbert]

[...]

I'm really glad you decided to take the plunge with this synth! It is IMO the best virtual synth I have ever used.

With that said, I have never found the sequencer useful for anything. Getting it to behave like a normal sequencer is cumbersome, unintuitive, and unreliable. Anyhow, I will try to answer your questions. I think it would be easiest to explain the sequencer using a video. I might make one in future. For now, I can only provide the following wall of text.

Does each of the inputs (the connection points along the top) pertain to a separate instance of the sequencer?

The connection points (aka. sockets) along the top are outputs, not inputs. With Bazille, red sockets are outputs, and grey sockets are inputs. This is a key principle required to understand this synth.

Now, as for the four sockets (outputs) at the top of the sequencer. To understand what they do, let's begin by considering an ordinary/familiar usage. The sequencer displays 16 steps. Suppose you want to program a 16-step sequence to modulate your filter cutoff. In that case (starting from an initialized patch), you would program your sequence using the sliders, and then patch ONLY the right-most output into your filter cutoff input (i.e., don't patch ANY of the other sockets into ANYTHING -- you will find out why later in this explanation).

Okay, so that's how we would ordinarily use a sequencer. Now, what are the other sockets for? Well, imagine you want to have multiple sequences running simultaneously. For example, you might want one sequence to modulate your filter cutoff, and a different sequence to modulate the pitch of the oscillator, and you want both of these sequencers running at the same time. To do that, you could add another sequencer module. However, Bazille is not that kind of modular synth. So, Bazille's way of running multiple sequences is to divide the sequencer into sections that can run simultaneously. So, you could divide the 16-step sequencer into two 8-step sequencers. Thus, to answer your question: that's what the four sockets are for -- they divide up the 16-step sequencer into any combination of four 4-step sequences (e.g., two 8-step sequences, or four 4-step sequences, or one 4-step sequence and a 12-step sequence, and so on).

How does that work? Well, suppose we wanted to divide the 16-step modulation sequence into two 8-step sequences -- one modulating filter cutoff, and the other modulating oscillator pitch. To do that, you would patch the right-most output into the filter cutoff, and the second-from-the-left output to the pitch. Accordingly, the first 8 steps in the sequence would modulate the pitch, and the second 8 steps would modulate the filter cutoff.

Hopefully the above explanation has been adequately clear. What you should now be able to understand is that connecting one of the sequencer's outputs to something activates a corresponding region/section of the sequence.

How does the dial work?

As I mentioned, the 16 sliders on the unit represent 16 steps of a sequence, just like any ordinary sequencer. Now, what if you want a sequence longer than 16 steps? That is what the dial is for -- it allows you to switch between eight sets of 16 steps, thereby allowing a sequence up to 128 steps. The idea is, you program your first set of 16 steps, then use the dial to switch to the second set of 16 steps, and so on. (The Bazille manual refers to each set of 16 steps as a "snapshot").

Alright, so suppose you have programmed in all 128 steps into each of the 8 dial "snapshots". But, if we patch the sequencer to something, it just cycles through one set of 16 steps. So now, how do we get the whole 128-step sequence to play? That is what the "rotate" knob is for. While programming in your 128-step sequence, you use the dial to switch between snapshots. Then, when you play the synth, if you have the rotate knob turned up, this will tell Bazille to turn the dial, cycling through the snapshots. The more your rotate knob is turned up, the faster Bazille will cycle through the snapshots.

If only that were the end of the story. With your 128-step sequence, you want each 16-step sequence to play through, one after the other, right? Well, instead of doing that, have you ever wished that each set of 16 steps in the sequence could morph into the next one? I never have, and I know of no one who has wished for such a thing. But, that is how Bazille's "rotation" behaves by default. By analogy, imagine visiting an art gallery, and instead of seeing each painting one after another, what you saw was a morphing superposition of the previous painting, the current painting, and the next painting in the sequence, so that you never see any of the paintings individually. Experiencing an art gallery in this way might, by random chance, be quite enjoyable on some occasions. But, the efforts of all the artists who contributed to the individual paintings would be quite wasted, as all of the fine details and other artistic choices they made are smeared together in a haphazard mess. I think this analogy nicely captures the spirit of the default behaviour of Bazille's sequencer.

So, how to circumvent this behaviour? You have to plug a signal into the "rotate" input to tell it how you want it to move the dial. In our case, we want the dial to sit on the first "snapshot" while the first 16 steps in the sequence are played, and at the exact moment when those 16 steps have ended, we want it to shift to the next 16 steps in the sequence, and so on, all the way up until the 8th snapshot, after which we want the dial to go back to the first "snapshot". So, you want the signal modulating the "rotate" knob to look like a staircase, and you want each step in the staircase to last exactly the same length of time as a "snapshot" of 16 steps in the sequence. You can use any signal, but an LFO makes the most sense, because it can synchronise with the host tempo. There is no LFO shape that looks like a staircase, so you have to use a ramp shape. To turn a ramp into a staircase, you have to quantize it (using the "quantizer). Adjust the quantization to turn the ramp into a set of eight steps, and voila! This is as close as you can get to making the sequencer play through each snapshot sequentially. In my experience, it doesn't really work -- perhaps due to a glitch in Bazille's LFOs, or perhaps due to some setting I have got wrong. It ends up missing steps that I sequenced in or exhibiting some other undesired behaviour. So, I don't recommend trying to use it as an ordinary sequencer. Why didn't I just say that to begin with? Because learning how to (try to) use it this way is a good way of learning how the unit works.

In my view, this default "morphing" behaviour is quite useless, so I would like to see a "quantize" button (i.e., a "normal sequencer" button) next to the rotate knob, that would make the "rotate" knob cycle through each "snapshot" one at a time instead of morphing.

[ghostwhistler]

[...]

I'm really glad you decided to take the plunge with this synth! It is IMO the best virtual synth I have ever used.

High praise indeed!

Thank you for the in depth response.

So, i Im understanding correctly, the outputs on the sequencer determine how many steps are used for that particular target. Thus, if you slot in the leftmost output, you will only use the first 4 steps. If you then input the rightmost slot you get to use all the rests, and so forth.

[Blogbert]

Thank you for the in depth response.

So, i Im understanding correctly, the outputs on the sequencer determine how many steps are used for that particular target. Thus, if you slot in the leftmost output, you will only use the first 4 steps. If you then input the rightmost slot you get to use all the rests, and so forth.

You are welcome!

Yes, I think you have got it right.

The way I would say it is that each socket activates and outputs a sequence containing all the sequencer steps to the left of it, until the next used socket to the left of it. So, if you plug something into the right-most socket (and none of the other sockets), then it will activate and output a sequence with all of the steps to the left of it, i.e., all 16 steps. Then, if you patch an additional connection in the second-from-the-right socket, that will activate and output a sequence of the first 12 steps, and the original socket will activate and output a sequence of 4 steps.

It's hard to explain using words, despite not being all that complicated. I suppose what makes it tricky is that the sockets are simple outputs, but they also dictate the length of the sequence.

[ghostwhistler]

Yes I think I am starting to get the hang of it now. The stuff with the map generators is also pretty complex though. I guess it depends on how complex you want your sounds to be. Presets always show what you can do, but not necessarily what you'd want to do

[Blogbert]

Yes I think I am starting to get the hang of it now. The stuff with the map generators is also pretty complex though. I guess it depends on how complex you want your sounds to be. Presets always show what you can do, but not necessarily what you'd want to do

I also found the map generators tricky to understand. I found it helpful to read the section on mapping generators from the ACE user guide; I found it more explanatory than the section in the Bazille user guide.

https://uhedownloads-heckmannaudiogmb.n ... -guide.pdf

[nusound mind]

Shout out to pdxindy for recommending (ceaselessly at KVR it seems haha) Bazille. I went with Repro back in the day, which I also love, but picked up Bazille and have put it to good use already.

I'm not a big reader of manuals or technical stuff I sort of fiddle around and see what happens. Love the filters and sound of Bazille. It's definitely confusing, I'm nowhere close to competently knowing how to program anything myself I flip through presets and then experiment changing various stuff around until I hit on something that sounds good and/or useful for my purposes.

I'm finding the arp for rhythmic stuff especially is fantastic.

[Howard]

OK, I'll have another look at the two manuals (ACE vs Bazille)... cheers!

[bmrzycki]

OK, I'll have another look at the two manuals (ACE vs Bazille)... cheers!

For what it’s worth I love your manual style Howard. The mix of history, timbre suggestions, warnings, and “homework” assignments engage me in a way simple descriptive manuals do not. The Bazille manual expectations of prior experience and time investment are IMO completely justified for this product and challenge me to keep coming back for a re-read after I get lost in sonic exploration.

(I’m not trying to start anything here, nor am I saying there isn’t room for improvement. I just wanted to say some of us really like the current approach.)

[krans]

I absolutely agree with bmrzkycki!
I find your manuals truly inspiring, Howard. I keep them stored on my phone at all times. I always discover new things when reading them. And they're funny.
Without getting all too soft, I don't think any other source has taught me more about synths (and tape machines) than your u-he manuals and the Bazille cookbook.

Not really choosing side in the discussion here, I just wanted to grab the opportunity to show some gratitude.