Elektron Musical Instruments

I was playing around with my MD today and realized that I really like
jamming with it, overtop of sequences I've programmed.  I'll add snare
beats and such... anyway, I thought it would be cool if there were a
temporary mute function as well, so that I can "take away" beats. 
maybe if you press function plus a track's button, it will be muted
until the end of the pattern (or until you press function+track button
again).  it's different from normal mutes in that it only lasts for
one pattern iteration, comes unmuted itself and you don't have to
enter mute mode to use it (so it's much quicker to get to).  the other
feature is that it would only mute the sequencer; pressing the track
trig button would still trig the machine.  then you could quickly mute
a track for one bar and put a different variation on it for that bar.
 the next bar is then back to normal.

would anyone else find this useful?  not that it might be done, but
it's still fun to dream, right? :-)

Joe

You have some good idea.  I especially like the sequencing mute.  How
many times have I thought something was buggy when it was just muted?
 I see no reason to have mute when you press the buttons.

I would like to see a M somewhere in the red screen rather than a
window.  I know it minimizes but it still gets in the way.

The temp mute function you suggest is a cool idea too.  Didn't you ask
elektron yet?  

--- In elektron-users@yahoogroups.com, "Joe" <jmelnyk@c...> wrote:

> 
> I was playing around with my MD today and realized that I really like
> jamming with it, overtop of sequences I've programmed.  I'll add snare
> beats and such... anyway, I thought it would be cool if there were a
> temporary mute function as well, so that I can "take away" beats. 
> maybe if you press function plus a track's button, it will be muted
> until the end of the pattern (or until you press function+track button
> again).  it's different from normal mutes in that it only lasts for
> one pattern iteration, comes unmuted itself and you don't have to
> enter mute mode to use it (so it's much quicker to get to).  the other
> feature is that it would only mute the sequencer; pressing the track
> trig button would still trig the machine.  then you could quickly mute
> a track for one bar and put a different variation on it for that bar.
>  the next bar is then back to normal.
> 
> would anyone else find this useful?  not that it might be done, but
> it's still fun to dream, right? :-)
> 
> Joe

i'd love to see, in the farflung future, a means to shift a machine hit via LFO (i'll
use the term loosely).

even as an end-user, i'm not sure how i'd like this to be implemented, but these are
the ideas rolling and colliding in my head:

LFO depth sets the maximum number of steps a hit can be shifted.  alternatively, it
could set the probability that the machine will be shifted at all.  i dunno which
would be better, or if we could have both.

LFO shape establishes pattern direction - shifted forward one, then two, then three,
and if it's sinusoidal in shape, the pattern retrogrades and repeats itself, this time
moving the hit backwards.  saw would be a series of deviations and returns to zero, random does what you'd expect, and blending the two LFO waveshapes would prolly sound pretty cool.

LFO speed would work as advertised, as well.  crazy as you like.


maybe this is realistically a matter for hardware sequencers like the p3 or
logic/DP/max/common lisp hackers, but when i get ideas like this, i like to share them.
i hope you don't mind...

-- 
yours,
niall.
.. .  .   .    .     .       .           .             .                 .
aleph null.                             a simple insinuation around silence.
http://syncretism.net
.. .. gpg public key - http://www.aleph-null.net/niall.gpg .. ..

On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 09:05:22AM -0700, niall munnelly wrote:
> 
> i'd love to see, in the farflung future, a means to shift a machine hit via LFO (i'll
> use the term loosely).

already i'm scrambling to correct myself.

by "hit", i don't just mean note-on, but parameter locks as well.

-- 
yours,
niall.
.. .  .   .    .     .       .           .             .                 .
aleph null.                             a simple insinuation around silence.
http://syncretism.net
.. .. gpg public key - http://www.aleph-null.net/niall.gpg .. ..

couldn't this theoretically be done by modulating the shuffle amount 
(+/-) via the lfo?  that would definately be a fairly nice feature!

On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 04:44:08PM -0000, logansquarewave wrote:
> 
> 
> couldn't this theoretically be done by modulating the shuffle amount 
> (+/-) via the lfo?  that would definately be a fairly nice feature!

that would have to be a pretty serious shuffle! =)  i'd still like to have the option to
keep every hit on the beat.

-- 
yours,
niall.
.. .  .   .    .     .       .           .             .                 .
aleph null.                             a simple insinuation around silence.
http://syncretism.net
.. .. gpg public key - http://www.aleph-null.net/niall.gpg .. ..

You could do it by making the pattern "shift" function (function + < or >)
an LFO destination...

cheers
ripe

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "niall munnelly" <aleph@...>
To: <elektron-users@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2004 11:49 AM
Subject: Re: [elektron] Re: while we're sharing neat ideas


>
> On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 04:44:08PM -0000, logansquarewave wrote:
> >
> >
> > couldn't this theoretically be done by modulating the shuffle amount
> > (+/-) via the lfo?  that would definately be a fairly nice feature!
>
> that would have to be a pretty serious shuffle! =)  i'd still like to have
the option to

> keep every hit on the beat.
>
> --

On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 07:41:34AM -0000, endlessnessisticman wrote:
>    I would like to see a M somewhere in the red screen rather than a
>    window.  I know it minimizes but it still gets in the way.
> 
>    The temp mute function you suggest is a cool idea too.  Didn't you ask
>    elektron yet? 

well, you address the point above, actually.  I'm pretty sure that
Elektron will say "good idea, but how will the user know what's
muted and what isn't then?"  you know, because they're crazy and
like to have good interfaces...:-)

On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 09:05:22AM -0700, niall munnelly wrote:
>    maybe this is realistically a matter for hardware sequencers like the p3
>    or
>    logic/DP/max/common lisp hackers, but when i get ideas like this, i like
>    to share them.
>    i hope you don't mind...

I think that this is a really good idea.  it reminds me of Ableton
clip envelopes, actually.  you can define an envelope (which is
itself just a generalization of an LFO, if you think about it) that
loops as the (audio or MIDI) clip loops.  as the envelope changes,
an offset of which section of the loop to play changes.  thus you
end up moving "hits" around.

but the idea for the MD is much better because it could be controlled
on the fly.  imagine having several machines with their LFO's set
that way and you press FUNCTION and change LFO depth - instant
chaos! :-)