Make Noise Intros Telharmonic, Multi-Voice, Multi-Algorithm Eurorack Module

MakeNoise_telharmonicMakeNoise has introduced the tELHARMONIC, a multi-voice, multi-algorithm Eurorack synthesizer module.

The new module, programmed by Tom Erbe, is inspired by Thaddeus Cahill’s Telharmonium, a proto-synth, originally created in 1897.

tELHARMONIC features three electronic tone generation techniques that are historically important, but infrequently implemented within modular synthesizers.

Here’s the official video intro:

TONIC, INTERVAL, DEGREE and D-GATE, allow for patch-programming of complex chord progressions, scales, melodies and playing styles. This Voltage Controlled Music Theory guides the Algorithms in a unified way, whereas CENTROID, FLUX and H-LOCK sculpt the timbre of each Algorithm uniquely, allowing for complex sounds to be created around a unified melodic structure and pattern.

  • 3 Voice Additive Harmonic synthesis inspired by Thaddeus Cahill’s Telharmonium, 1897
  • Noise synthesis inspired by early computer music piece “Analog 1: Noise Study” by James Tenney, 1961
  • 3 Voice Phase Modulation synthesis inspired by early commercial digital synthesis, 1980’s
  • CENTROID, FLUX and H-LOCK animate each Algorithm uniquely
  • All Algorithms available simultaneously at their respective outputs
  • 6 octaves of continuous 1V/ Octave pitch control
  • 4 octaves of quantized pitch control
  • Voltage Controlled Music Theory
  • DEGREE Modulation able to be synchronized by clock or gate via D-Gate input
  • Gate Out completes the conversation between tELHARMONIC and rest of system!
  • Utilizes High performance DSP hardware with 24bit, 48kHz codec, 32 bit floating point processing
  • Reasonable power consumption
  • Pairs well with Optomix

Module Specifications:

  • Width: 14hp
  • Max Depth: 30mm
  • Power: 149mA@ +12V
    15mA @ -12V

Pricing and Availability

Make Noise’s new Telharmonic module is available now from dealers worldwide for a suggested retail price of $349 US. For additional information, consult the MakeNoise website.

21 thoughts on “Make Noise Intros Telharmonic, Multi-Voice, Multi-Algorithm Eurorack Module

  1. It’s a lot smaller than a Telharmonium – “the instrument was ‘portable’ – taking up thirty railroad carriages when transported from Holyoke, Mass to NYC” 🙂

  2. I just played around a little with the tELHARMONIC at Control. Sounds great. Sounds unique. Very much encourages twiddling. They’re going to sell well.

  3. is it a digital module?? I see that in part it’s modeling the CZ-101, very cool. Damn why did I sell that !??!
    This module sounds badass. love MN

  4. Makenoise demo’s often use sequences of random steps to drive their modules, which make the audio jum all over the place.

    I prefer to hear something more melodic like an arpeggiated chord, and slower trmpo. Then adjust the parameters more slowly.

    Ideally – drones.

    1. Weird. That’s almost exactly what most Make Noise users music sounds like too.

      Random bleep bloop stuff with no structure or technique.

      It’s why synth meets sound just like the hands on demos at trade shows.

      I love something that slowly develops and changes…rather than just being random for randoms sake.

      1. Umm…. ok. So if you aren’t capable of perceiving structure and technique then they are not there? And you’ve heard ‘most’ of Make Noise users music? And your the only person capable of judging whether something is random for a reason, or random for random’s sake, right? Or are you just repeating the same tired ‘bloop bleep’ criticism we have all heard a million times before because you fundamentally lack the creativity to critique music on its own terms, in your own language? Muppet.

        1. I could say Squlch Ribble Ribble Wubba…if that’s closer to what your music sounds like.

          Go watch some Make Noise stuff on youtube and then enlighten us with your analysis.

        2. Bleep bloop includes burble squeeeoooo flarb as well.

          And drumlines with some squggles added.

          Not trying to be mean or anything, but these are 3600 dollar instruments….the second one there is 4600.

          Just watch the first 15 videos inder Make Noise Shared on youtube that are not demos posted by makenoise themselves.

        3. Guys like you keep being defensive about everything… Why? If he’s wrong, then why bother. Is it because he’s right to some extent? MN make great instruments, that can do amazing things. The demos and style of MN videos caters to a certain type and style of musician, and if you’re smart you can just pay attention and see if it’s for you, even if that style music isn’t your interest. That’s his bad. But there’s many of us musicians who have been around the block enough to see the trends come and go, and come to modular with a different skill set, interest, and it’s frustrating to see people make the argument “you just don’t see my technique” when it’s just… um… bad technique? That’s your bad. MN stuff does so much more and in every direction of music. There’s “random based electronic music” (Subotnik etc) and “Bloop Bloop” (rich american teenagers who think their SoundCloud is breaking new ground every day at 4pm.) Bloop Bloop isn’t groundbreaking, it was done 40+ years ago. Is it fun sure but it is not doing anything that hasn’t been done already. Maybe they are the “muppet” because their resistence to learn, and maybe making/learning 12T music first to know where the box is before you become arrogant enough to think you can “break it” when the bloop bloop has been around for 40+ years! People called my first random/modular record “bloop bloop” in 1992 and it took me 2 more albums to see- the problem wasn’t them and “closed minds” it was me not doing my homework and seeing all the work Buchla/Subotnik/Tape Center/etc. did and how I wasn’t being groundbreaking- I was unknowningly copying, by being uneducated, arrogant, and I see nothing in the post 2010 modular crowd that is any different.

          1. Exactly this.

            It’s a bit like when young painters strike out into abstraction or landscapes with no real grasp of the basics of composition, color balance, and perspective.

            While not a guaranteed requirement, a firm grounding in theory and the history behind the form is important.

            As far as the Make Noise official demos, Tony has stated many times that they are demonstrating the range, tonality, and controls in their videos and they are not meant as an example of musicality. That’s why I can forgive them a bit.

            1. I have the feeling that the truth is somewhere between the two extremes. Being immersed in the history and theory of some art form can be a huge burden that stifles creativity. And I don’t mean creativitiy in the sense that someone is creating ground breaking, neve before seen or heard stuff, but actually goes out and creates something. I firmly believe that no matter how original (or not) a piece of art is, it will ultimately be judged on its own merits if it is any good. A good song is still a good song even if it uses the same chords as some other song. Same goes for sounds like 808, 909, 303, whatever. If the track is any good, it will stand out in a mix, will command some attention, people will want to hear it again, etc. The attitude of the “artist” makes all the difference.

              1. You don’t have to get a doctorate in Music Theory or Art Criticism.

                You just need to know where previous artists have traveled as a new point of departure.

                You can learn by doing and making your own discoveries and mistakes…but you will have to accept that your exploration may never go in the right direction without some sort of reading, study, or background.

                Redoing everything on your own is just as stifling.

                Don’t be surprised when people say you work is derivative and uniformed, if you choose not to educate yourself.

          2. You seem to be having an argument with yourself. No one has said ‘you just don’t see my technique’. I merely pointed out that to lay into ‘most’ of Make Noise users as bleepy music (inferring no talent) is plain arrogant. Just as it is arrogant for you to infer that people making ‘bleepy’ music are a)uninformed as to the history of their instrument and style (whilst using an instrument directly named after that history!) and b)trying to always be groundbreaking and new. No one has suggested these things, and yet it is a constant criticism of all forms of broadly avant-garde/experimental music – the assumption that your trying to break new ground when you might simply be a) enjoying the sounds your making, or b)exploring and learning the techniques of existing practitioners, same as any other genre. I make no assumptions as to the quality of your technique, because I have never heard your music. If you told me you make EDM (or any other genre) I wouldn’t assume anything about your technique, aims or skill set. And yet, your willing to judge ‘most’ Make Noise users intentions and techniques based on a few you tube videos by a handful of the many thousands of people making music in and around that genre?

    2. I find it maddening when a demo uses the same sequence of notes over the course of an entire demo. Give me random any time, simply for sanity’s sake.

  5. Know what else is inspired by the Telharmonium?

    Tonewheel organs. Just mini versions of the big disks produced sine waves that you add together.

    That’s probably why there is lots of noise and distortion stuff added to this….otherwise it’s a tonewheel organ module

    1. i’ll buy that! i definitely have learned a lot from reading descriptions of the early optical and tone wheel organs…. tH has 24 “tone wheels” per note and only 3 notes, so a slight difference in implementation (and sound), but a lot of the variation in the module is obtained by smoothly (or quickly) changing the gain of each partial, much like a tone wheel organ stop…

  6. I get the impression that makenoise could put anything into eurorack modular form and it would be cool and highly desirable. Not sure what I’d use this for but I’m sure in the right hands this could be great.

  7. I love to listen to melodic music and prefer to make it myself, but there is a valid place for beep & bloop sounds in music. Who doesn’t like to hear a broken robot? I’m serious here, I’m into science fiction and listening to a robot self-destruct over a does-not-compute error is kinda great. as far as the demo video, the guy in the video said more demos are coming, that explain more of what it can do. I’m sure it’s capable of melodic and chord progression music and/or broken robots.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *