Shuffle clock?


I’m thinking about building a master BPM clock that outputs a beat, and divides it by 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 ,12, and 16 to cover the common intervals. I’d like to include some form of shuffle similar to the one in the 4ms SCM eurorack, but I’m at a bit of a loss as to exactly how that might work in this context. Any suggestions?


If you wanted to recreate a eurorack master clock based around BPM, may I recommend Pamela’s New Workout?

It’s been in my case for a while now and it’s definitely on the “never sell” list. If you had any questions about behavior I could experimentally verify it.

Old Linn machines had shuffle quantized to 24 intervals over a quarter note. But I guess real question is does that scale with the divided clock?


Actually, I didn’t know you could get a shuffling clock divider kit for DIY. Maybe that will be my next project. It doesn’t look too hard.


What you’d have to do is pick an interval that is shuffled - usually 8ths or 16ths. Depending on which is selected, some of the divisions won’t sound shuffled.

I didn’t actually realize myself that there was such difference between swing and shuffle. But this topic might hold some wisdom to follow.


Interesting article. Always neat to learn something new. I used the “shuffle” term because that what 4ms uses, although from this article, that doesn’t appear to be its common usage. I guess the question I really have is If I “swing” the eighths, what should happen to the 16ths, 32nds etc? Or should the swing be selectable for each division separately? If the latter, should each division have a separate control for the amount of swing? I don’t want to build something that is overly complex since that usually means more CPU, but at the same time I want it to be useful.


As I understand it, only the 16ths and 32nds, etc that line up with those 8ths are affected.

So if you have

x---x---x---x--- quarter
x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x- eighth
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx sixteenth

x---x---x---x--- quarter
x-s-x-s-x-s-x-s- swung eighth
xxsxxxsxxxsxxxsx sixteenth

…I think!


Well it all comes down to what sounds good. If the beat is funky, then either definition is well suited for the task.


Actually that sounds pretty logical to me. The approach 4ms used in their SCM unit is very flexible but I think this approach is closer to what I had in mind. Thanks for the help! I guess I’ll give it a shot and see how it turns out.