Compatibility with Organelle Patches?

Part of the thinking which got me to back this campaign is the dream of a DIY version of the Critter & Guitari Organelle (a Pd-based hardware device which works as an instrument or FX box, etc.). The Organelle site has a good number of example patches which cover some pretty neat use cases. Also, there are some Automatonism modules to support the Organelle.

Like pisound, Organelle is meant to be used headless. It uses a small LCD screen, a few knobs, and a “keyboard” with little buttons.

There’s at least one person who’s built a Raspberry Pi setup which works directly with those Organelle patches. So, there probably isn’t any incompatibility with the board itself.

Wonder how difficult it’d be to reproduce the same functionality with pisound (the DIY project uses the stm32f0 board to interface with the actuators and sensors). Most likely, there wouldn’t be anything specific to the HAT, especially if some of the available GPIO ports are enough to make things work. But maybe somebody has insight about this?

1 Like


I think if you’d have pure data objects that react to MIDI messages (even better if they’re compatible as is to Organelle’s “knob” objects, so porting patches wouldn’t be needed), it’d be possible to achieve similar features. This would cover the user input part via serial MIDI ports or USB midi, and using boards like Arduino, it’s relatively easy to build custom MIDI devices.

For the display part, the LCD connector that’s on Raspberry Pi board could be used, or some display could be connected to GPIO peripherals such as I2C, or SPI. As pisound is using SPI for MIDI, it could be not trivial to add another device to the SPI bus, but in theory it should be possible.

Hi Folks

I am shreeswifty on the organelle site and i ordered my pisound last week and i am trying to be patient to get one.
Lets just say this. There will be FULL integration of Organelle patches, Pure Data and pisound very shortly. I will even get that fancy button to do stuff too :slight_smile:



That is amazing!
Any hints on how you are going to solve the mapping of the controls?

Honestly until i have it in my hands it would all be guessing that’s why i am so excited to get it. I am really looking forward to MIDI DINs for sure and a really nice audio rate /quality too. I think technobear already reported on how the main functions behave in his report on Raspi Stretch so i would most likely just go from there.


To get you even more excited… I have been running most of Technobear’s Mutable-Instruments-based externals on the Rpi3/Pisound and they all work beautifully! I guess making Organelle patched compatible really is just a matter of figuring out how to deal with the variability of MIDI controllers that could potentially be connected to the Rpi…
I must be honest though… the more I try to make Organelle patches work on my Rpi, the more I want an Organelle :slight_smile:

yes. We have made alot of headway in the last few months. I just completed the first set of FFT tools, a full set of Vintage Synth emulations that make use of Fluidsynth~ and several new 303 clones for bass flavors as well as all the LADSPA plugins (pre-DSSI/LV2 plugins). I am aware of technobears work with the Mutable code it’s another great reason to have an organelle.

My new patches for MIDI will have a MIDI Learn feature that will let you map your controller and save it in a txt file so ANY supported ALSA MIDI device should work fine

1 Like

@Enkerli , so Im working on a solution for this … and have my first working patch

Im taking a different approach, rather than aiming at being 100% compatible with the Organelle
(which I could easily do, by just interpreting the organelle ‘mother osc’ messages)

Im creating a parameter system that is portable , i.e. I can write organelle patches with it, and they will display correctly on the organelle BUT the same patch can also be used on any other PD platform , with other controllers.
(in this demo the Push 2 with an Organelle, but runs fine with Push 2 on the rPI)

the reason for this is pretty simple… why would you want to render 6 lines of display, and four pots , if you have a higher resolution display with a touch screen? (or encoders and hi res push display in this instance)

sure this might mean some ‘patch adaptation’, but the idea is simple… do it once, then use it everywhere
(e.g. the above works on macOs/Linux/rPI/Bela - I use the mac for developing patches then use them elsewhere)

ultimately this is a distribute parameter system, so I can also render it to other controllers… e.g. for the PiSound, I plan to do a small Juce app, that will allow me to control these things the 7" touchscreen ive got attached to my rPI.

as the parameters are all distributed via OSC, I could also push the UI to an iPad, e.g. via Lemur.

its also going to support midi learn too, so you can use it with ‘dumb midi controllers’… basically setup on something with a display, then simply copy the preset file over to use on a completely headless device.
(though personally, Im love my Push 2… so thats my weapon of choice ;))


@thetechnobear, this is an amazing!

The universal parameter system is something that will make a lot of people really happy :slight_smile: and I guess the importance of it will grow exponentially in the near future as there are more and more platforms that are supporting PureData.

MIDI-learn is something I am really looking forward to. Personally, I am not a fan of touch-screens for controls, so the use case, when you can just download a patch, MIDI-map it in seconds with your phone and just mess around with any MIDI controller is really appealing to me. :slight_smile:

Just out of curiosity - what’s your plan for the adoption to the different control surfaces, e.g. Push with up to 8 params per page vs Organelle with 4?

Great project! :+1:

1 Like

thanks, yeah, for my projects its a missing piece of the jigsaw, especially as I don’t want to have to keep adapting patches … especially as the UI always seems to be the ‘fiddly bit’

yeah, i think midi learn is important - I think in this ‘micro’ area, many of us like physical controls.

the touchscreen app is a bit of an aside, I want a desktop application really for testing/developing patches… but I thought, as long as its can be resized (ie rescale controls when fullscreen!) it’ll work as a touch screen interface too

the underlying system allows for any number per page, so the controller render decides how to handle this.

on the Organelle, im probably going to initially implement ‘sub pages’ e.g. say you have a 12 parameters defined for a page, then the organelle will show these as Oscillator 1/3 , Oscillator 2/3.
(another possibility is a scrolling items list, but not sure that’s faster really, and im trying to avoid nested menus)

on the Push2, I’ll follow the standard ‘live’ mode, so using the page keys to get to other parameters.

but yeah, id like to encourage patch developers to group parameters by function, rather than be considering device limitations.

1 Like

Wow that’s incredible !!!

Speaking of which:

as an experiment, i tried modifying the grids patch here to work with my pi set up:

It was totally straight forward, even for a novice like me. I’m on windows, so I had to remote into the rpi to modify the patch directly, all very straight forward. Looking forward to building the braids and clouds modules into an automationism patch… :slight_smile:


Hi there,
I also bought the PiSound with the hope of using the organelle patches with Pisound and Rpi.
I can see someone on Youtube (severedgarden) has managed to run some of the organelle patches on Rpi via Purr Data on L2ork. There was more or less the same visual interface as the organelle.
I tried installing PdPi as it is recommended but i won’t boot on my rpi3 :slight_smile:
I guess I would be better off buying an organelle instead, but I really like that open source thing. So if one can help I would be so grateful :smiley:

1 Like

organelle uses vanilla pd doesn’t it? try running the patches with vanillla.

I am sorry but I am really a beginner down here, is that the standard distro of pure data ?

if you follow the pisound set up you will have pd vanilla on the pi by default. then it is just a matter of opening the patches and poking around.

What i meant by them working was not simulating them on the pisound but compiled libraries [FFTEase, lyonpotpuourri, soundhack, pmpd etc…] that will work seamlessly and the Organelle ‘stuff’ will be removed for traditional controls

I will just need a little guidance with the “button”

Do folks WANT to use pd headless [without a screen at very least]
I have about 22 years experience with pure data so i wanted to clarify what i was talking about.
i am not talking about direct replications that would be kind of a waste of time but certainly the patches working.

I would like to get some feedback before this group gets too large as well
How are you running pd? headless or with a monitor/traditional linux setup
Are you using a MIDI controller?

I found with my tests that i can run much more processor intensive patches on the pisound than the organelle so there’s that too. I am thinking of a Moog emulation, a set of FFT effects, a Full featured Granular sampler and a multi effects system for the Pisound Suite.


Thanks for your help.
Damn, I must have missed something. The default pd string patch works flawlessly with my arturia minilab mk2, but I can’t get a sound (the mother desktop shows no input when i’m playing the keys). No sound either when i click with the mouse on the keys in the mother desktop patch.

FWIW, I personally want to use pisound headless as a much as possible. I am using the pisound with a custom diy midi controller, assigning fixed midi CC values inside pure data patches.

Eventually, I will configure the pisound button to cycle between various pd patches. the patches will be kind of self playing/improvisation systems. Much like a patched modular synthesizer.

I am developing patches on a windows machine, and moving them to the pisound to play with them. All very basic really, I don’t know much about linux.

1 Like