Home | ER-101 | ER-102 | ER-301 | Wiki | Contact

Thread To Break The Forum Silence



Indeed, and also confusing!

Looks like both are upgradable one way or another. That’s all :slight_smile:


Just seen that thread and Bert does come across a bit strident in it. I guess that is his marketing strategy and maybe he’s a bit fed up of people moaning/discounting it due to the price of it.


is the cpu in percussa upgradable?




I’m looking forward to having both SSP and ER-301 in my case, and I expect they won’t be the last modules I own that include powerful CPUs. I’m glad they’re upgradable though, because they certainly aren’t cheap.

Not sure getting frustrated is a “marketing strategy” so much as a normal human emotion. People seem to forget these one or two person companies are largely a labor of love, and applying consumerist attitudes (comparing feature lists, etc) really misses the point. I’d be frustrated too.


What sells and differentiates all these DSP products are the code… not the internal tech.

I don’t care what the guts are underneath, I don’t care if the SSP uses a chip a million times more powerful. It’s still not a 301, and the 301 isn’t an SSP. It’s like comparing a Korg and a Roland synth. Different colours, different design philosophy.

Just get both! :smiley::wink:


This is a misconception of personal impression versus the factual points of the matter. The very code that you say is so important is limited in everyway by the hardware it runs on. The hardware also dictates what features and functionailty is possible. (Just look at the difference in ports, etc.)

Also let’s not forget, especially since O|D has so masterfully demonstrated it, the code in these modules can be incrementally updated and improved. The hardware not so much. So while the code is what makes it do something, the hardware platform is what enables that code.

It is all relevant.

But yes, get both!!!


Hey 2disbetter. I’m selling my MacBook Pro 2015. Wanna buy that? It should be more capable than SSP hardware and software wise.


Shrug, I know you meant it as a joke, but my mac is definitely my most useful musical instrument (one of many, some containing CPU or MPCs, others that don’t use electricity at all…)


You have no idea how many times this train of thought has been answered.

However, barring the fact that I’d never buy an Apple computer to begin with, unless it was required for some development I’m working on, I would say my previous comment still applies.

All computers are not created the same, and all operating systems aren’t either.

For example, does your macbook pro have a total of 24 jacks capable of interfacing with other eurorack and modular gear? 16 of which are capable of sampling audio and cv (DC coupled) at up to 192kHz/32 bit, while another 8 are capable of outputing both audio and cv(once again DC coupled) at up to 192kHz/32 bit.

Not sure, but I think the MBPs still have more than 1 usb port, but depending on which apple computer you use, the SSP even has more USB ports. :rofl: The SSP is able to receive and transmit audio over USB, making it equally useful as a bridge to your DAW, should you so wish. (Saving the need to get an audio interface that most likely has a lower sampling rate anyway.)

On top of that does your MBP run an embedded version of Linux stripped of bloat and unnessary processes, such that DSP work is the primary function?

And unlike the e370 which is just an oscillator, but like the er-301, the SSP, isn’t just one module in the logical sense. It is many. I’ve had a patch using 26 modules, for example. You can buy it, and not need many other modules, or you can buy it, and augment your rack as if you bought several other modules. All taking up less space, and costing less.

The hardware makes a difference, and while I’m of the believe that computers will one day make eurorack and modular synthesis redundant, modules like the 301 and SSP are helping modular synthesis be the ultimate synthesis tool it is.

Edit: Maybe posts regarding the SSP could be moved to a more general thread.
Edit #2: I think physical feedback and control surfaces will never be made redundant. They might change or evolve, however.


<Wobbly time-travel vortex … >

“Look at Grandpop with his AR lenses and his haptic rings! No one uses those anymore - it’s all about Real Knobs these days! He doesn’t even know what a Jack Cable is!”


As suggested I moved the posts here instead - and I managed not to mess it up this time :slight_smile:

Looked up the SSP - yeowch - $2000 = £1409 * 1.23 for VAT and Import duty and it’s around about £1750 - that’s a lot of dough!!!

I must admit that it doesn’t appeal to me anywhere near as much as the ER-301 does, I get the IO and the convenience factors, but it does seem much closer to a computer interface as has been suggested. It’s a reasonable comparison and with a couple of DC coupled sound cards a similar environment could be set up using a regular computer. I actually have the gears to do this, but I don’t want to. The reason I like the ER-301 is that it is just far enough away from that side of things that it doesn’t feel like using a computer - even though it obviously is.

Shrugs, each to their own - it’s all good :smiley:


The thing that I find interesting is that people always balk at the price, but split up that cost into 4 to 6 euorack modules which still only do a fraction of what the SSP can, and nobody bats an eye. The 370 for example is 4hp smaller, and is just a VCO that pushes 16 oscillators max, for nearly a grand! The SSP can run stacked wavetable oscillators in 16, 32, and 64 oscillators depths, and STILL have room to do more.

I don’t know of any way you can spend $2 grand and get all of what the SSP gives you. (24 total jacks at a 192kHz/32 bit rate, FPGA based bus interconnect between the jacks and cpu for maximum bandwidth, 2 client USB ports and 1 host USB port, midi to cv routing via usb midi, audio interface capability with DAWs, an open and scalable platform for additional modules based on the VST standards, and the list just goes on and on.) I mean this in the case of using a regular computer and a DAW, combined with sound cards and modules (expert sleepers for example), but also just in the euro world.

If you look at the SSP and see only a computer, you will miss the big deal here, as well as convienetly not apply that same logic to all of the other digital modules in your rack. It’s my hope that as videos come out and the SSPs use is made more evident, this aversion to anything that resemebles a computer will be thwarted some. It is an aversion that is simply standing in the way of progress within a market that by its very nature shouldn’t have any such road blocks.


My apologies, I didn’t mean to reduce it in such a way, I totally get the inherent value too!

Regardless, even with all the features it has it still doesn’t appeal to me

And don’t forget it’s only $2k if you live in the US, for us in the EU it’s $2.5K

Basically I’d have to sell out an entire rack of gear to be able to afford it; my 104hp 6U MI rack for example is about the same price, okay slightly more but only a couple of hundred $, and I lose all that beautifully designed UI in favour of something that with the most generous outlook in the world can’t begin to compare on that level, I’d have to supplement it with controllers that simply aren’t available to create a similar user experience. Yes there are controllers available, but they are not laid out in the same way, they don’t have the legends, etc… I like the design aspect of the MI stuff a lot and find it pleasurable to use. That’s balanced with the ER-301, which is also at the opposite end of the spectrum and has the same kind of requirements for use - I can cope with that, somehow that works for me.

Yes, in many respects it can technically outperform the MI rack, there’s no need to reiterate again what it can do - I get it, but that’s just not interesting enough for me to make that kind of switch.

Anther approach; maybe if I sold the ER-301’s? That would cover it, more or less, but then I lose all the time and effort invested in that environment and am starting again from scratch, again, this doesn’t appeal.

This is the kind of personal preference discussion that lives in the same world as one knob per function vs digital multi function modules.

I think the SSP will do well, I don’t want to come across as putting it down in any way, it’s just a different approach that doesn’t appeal to me personally :slight_smile:


I’ve just realised what the SSP reminds me of - the Waldorf Blofeld! Really similar in layout and it seems there’s a fairly large overlap in terms of functionality.

Obviously that’s not all the SSP does and there are significant differences, no need to spell them out, but if I wanted a polyphonic morphing wavetable synth I would probably go for the blofeld, they are a tenth of the price second hand :wink:


If you wanted just a polyphonic morphing wavetable synth sure, you could go that route. Of course I’m not really sure you fully comprehend all of what the SSP can do.

What you are doing is looking at a car, and saying if I wanted just a wheel, I would buy just a wheel. (Of course this is assuming all wheels are the same, and there is no difference in quality, which of course is not the case.) Of course a wheel is cheaper than a car, but it’s also not a car.

You would loose 104hp of modules, gain 60hp, and be able to do with that 60hp what 3 rows of 104hp could do, and in the process gain a couple hundred $ or a couple thousand if you replaced more rows.

Your comments here make me question that my friend. :grinning:


Oh come on… give me a little credit!!



Okay, I challenge you, build a 8 voice modal synth in SSP with 2 * 64 filters and an algorithm to sweep through about 30 sweet spots where those 128 filters have been tuned to recreate sounds similar to hitting wood, metal, glass and I’ll be impressed :wink:



What module(s) are you using to do this currently?


Elements - brilliant UI, awesome sounds - I’ve been working hard at them for a about 2 years, maybe more, and am still finding new sounds! They are tuned to perfection, I’ve tried to create similar elsewhere and it’s going to take months of work, even using a computer with relatively unlimited resources because it’s a phenomenal amount of work.

Actually to be completely fair, and to make the comparison to my rack the SSP should also be able to produce 6 independent sound sources for the modal synth, do granular synthesis up to 60 grains, three reverbs, a very complex wave folder with a wide variety of algorithms to choose from. It should include a dual random sequence generator that can be locked and tweaked with complex feedback options. It should be a full parametric EQ for precise sound shaping, 4 independent midi to CV/Gate pairs that can be configured however you like and freely routed to multiple destinations in the patch. It should be able to do at least 6 stage envelope generation and complex modulations. And finally but not least, emulate vactrols and give control over the shape and response curves of those vactrols.

Edit: oops I should also say that it should include plumbing, mixers, atenuverters, rectifiers - full and half wave, and a few other bits and pieces, oh and a dual Bernouli Gate.

To give you a chance, I am not including about 80% of the other things this rack does. It’s fucking amazing and it would take a monumental effort to make me swap this over, I mean, you are going to have to absolutely blow my brains out with sound quality and ease of use.

I’m waiting… patiently… I don’t expect anything soon, I know it took Olivier months to program Elements in this way, never mind everything else.

Good luck!!!

p.s. downloading the source code for Elements is cheating - badly!!