Concept: Zoomable Pattern Editor

[00.1]

@danoise

Also not sure what the looping thing means - you imagine a new feature, something a bit like the clip arranger?

I’ve been thinking more about this question and I thought the answers I gave were valid but I wanted to give a bit more credit to the current method of aliases.

It is possible to organize a pool of clips with aliases, one way to do this with rhythms for example is to

fist create an alias section in the Pattern Matrix and max its pattern length to 200,

then create another section for your rhythms. These two are going to be linked.

The thing with clips is that it is user definable, so that means what the beginning and end for one composer maybe different for another composer.

In the example above I have a percussive loop…

begin clip [3/16 3/32 3/32 3/32 3/32] end clip

however, since other instruments and rhythms are involved, you could also save the clip as…

begin clip [3/16 3/32 3/32 3/32 3/32] [3/16 3/32 3/32 3/32 3/32] [3/16 3/32 3/32 3/32 3/32] [3/16 3/32 3/32 3/32 3/32] end clip

I would consider the latter more of a phrase, the former being the root of the phrase.

So if I wanted to save just the root of the phrase, I would save it on the first column of a track, mute it and keep the phrase on the second column.

With the alias section I created before, I now have an exact copy which I can unalias later and just save the roots for other songs.

[00.1]

Here is another short composition with the same concept of in order of appearance.

I spent more time composing with “loop point” thing in mind and another way to look at it is “render point”.

For example, a render point for a dry drum loop may be shorter than one with effects.

I didn’t document the effects rhythms for this however. But as stated a few sentences above, I have started to treat “loop point” as “render point”.

In this example I’ve rendered synths with effects once for percussion and once for melody.

So with those “loop point” markers, I can place the trigger points for the rendered percussion and melody.

All this may be a bit off topic to post here but the concept of zoomable reminds me of birds eye view of predators such as hawks who zero in on their prey.

In this case, zeroing on significant points of interest.

07.. --03 --32 --12  
06.. --01 --08 --16  
05.. --03 --16 --24  
04.. --01 --04 --32  
03.. --03 --08 --48  
02.. --15 --32 --60  
01.. --09 --08 -144  

============= ===========  
Percussion... Melody.....  
============= ===========  
|0101o----5-- |..........  
|0201|------7 |01o----5--  
|0304|----5-- |..........  
|.............|02|----5--  
|0401|------7 |..........  
|0504|----5-- |03|--3----  
|0101o----5-- |..........  
|0201|------7 |04|----5--  
|0304|----5-- |..........  
|.............|05|------7  
|0401|------7 |06|-2-----  
|0504|----5-- |..........  

[danoise]

@00.1

All this may be a bit off topic to post here but the concept of zoomable reminds me of birds eye view of predators

Yeah, slightly offtopic perhaps but not entirely. It’s good to exchange ideas - how we perceive music is deeply subjective stuff

Speaking of compact representation of the music, here is something I made to see just how much a pattern could be squeezed:

We could still have a “zoomable view” of the pattern, but for a native solution, it should probably be less fashionable, more “straight to the point”.

It was suggested that the zoom level should be synced with edit-step, and I strongly think that is the way to go.
Then you would have a pattern which, when zoomed, was always edited “line by line” (the lines in between simply being hidden).

[00.1]

@danoise

Speaking of compact representation of the music, here is something I made to see just how much a pattern could be squeezed:

Cool, it looks like DNA. The mock up does point out a couple of immediate visual references regarding music theory that the Pattern Matrix does not.

The five species in counterpoint writing. A quick rundown of the five species:

Counterpoint is “The production of beautiful harmony by a combination of well-characterized melodies.”
In other words, write one melody, then another melody over it and so on.
This technique was invented before chords, and I think it was the precursor of chords.
The five species are like basic building blocks, something I think we naturally do when composing.

In this example, we have two lanes, which could represent as bass and lead.

01 01 Species one: add one note for one note.  
  
01 -- Species two: add two notes for one note.  
-- 01  
-- 02  
-- --  
  
01 01 Species three: add three or more notes for one note.  
-- 02  
-- 03  
-- --  
  
01 -- Species four: suspend one note onto the next.  
-- 01  
-- ||  
-- ||  
02 ||  
-- ||  
-- --  
-- --  
  
Species five is combining all if not most of them.  
  
For Species four, although currently there is no visual reference as to the actual length of a note trigger, I don't think this is a deal breaker.  

The mock up could also point out the concept of rise, fall, and drone (repeating notes), which is applicable both for rhythms and notes.

If I used three columns, I could express

a continuously “falling” note on column 1
a “droning” note on column 2
a “rising” note on column 3

========== ==========  
percussion melody.... These are rhythmic palettes, percussion for example has two unique rhythmic lengths, 12 lines and 24 lines.  
========== ==========  
02 0332.12 04 0332.12  
01 0316.24 03 0316.24  
-- ----.-- 02 0308.48  
-- ----.-- 01 1532.60  
========== ==========  
|01 1 - -| |-- - - -|  
|02 - - 2| |01 - - 3| melody event 01 is using number 03 out of 04 unique rhythmic events  
|03 1 - -| |-- - - -|  
|-- - - -| |02 - 3 -| melody event 02 is using number 03 out of 04 unique rhythmic events, placed on the "droning" column.  
|04 - 1 -| |-- - - -|  
|-- - - -| |03 2 - -| melody event 03 is using number 02 out of 04 unique rhythmic events, placed on the "falling" column.  
|05 - - 2| |-- - - -|  
|01 1 - -| |-- - - -|  
|02 - - 2| |04 - - 3| melody event 04 is using number 03 out of 04 unique rhythmic events, placed on the "rising" column.  
|-- 1 - -| |-- - - -|  
|03 - - -| |-- - - -|  
|-- - 1 -| |05 - - 4| melody event 05 is using number 04 out of 04 unique rhythmic events  
|04 - - -| |06 1 - -| melody event 06 is using number 01 out of 04 unique rhythmic events  
|05 - - 2| |-- - - -|  

I wrote this tune for a rekkerd contest, theme was about moving, so I thought it would be nice to move from electronic instruments to organic instruments. This was Renoise version released with comb filters.

I wrote it with Ledger’s Ticky Roll tool which had a collapsed view option and with dblue’s slices to pattern for odd rhythms.

Ticky Roll’s compact view was great because I could extend and evolve multiple melodies while keeping track of the entire sequence of events.

However, I must admit that I mentally broke just about when I was going to write for the organic instruments part, it just became way too chaotic and hard to keep track of what was going on at that point.

I’m placing this track here as an example of a musical result of “compact view”.

http://soundcloud.com/daemonarmada/renoise-suggestion02

[Dunks]

If audio/automation tracks get added then maybe something like this would be good, using a key + scroll-wheel combo, zoom slider and buttons as options to zoom.

[00.1]

@danoise

Just to twist this concept a bit further, I have been toying with a similar concept…Basically, imagine that whenever you tweak some parameter in a song, you have a special view that can display detailed information about the parameter?
You can then tell Renoise that the parameter belong to a “parameter collection”, and you can display this, and the other parameters, side by side. Perhaps even add (timed) comments of your own, etc.
Personally, I tend to work on a song detail for a while, getting quite absorbed by it. And often, this detail is not in some specific parameter but maybe two, or three, spread across various tracks and at various stages in the song. So, while a feature (or tool) that could “document” these things wouldn’t really add anything substantially new to Renoise, I still think it could be beneficial - especially when doing collaborations.

I imagine “parameter collection” would be less confusing than a “wire connection” view,

because with “parameter collection” at least it could be collected and sorted, section by section of the entire musical piece.

Whereas “wire connection” would just be a web, however that could still be useful…

I’m still trying to figure a different suggestion other than a “wire connection” - better visual cues on control flows: meta-devices, pattern commands, automations, combinations.

The 2.8.1 mixer view is pretty pimped out. It’s my home view sort of speak, probably because to me, its a distilled view of everything.

Track groups and track colors go a long way in telling me what I’ve done and what I will do.

[insane (allie)]

In theory, one could do a limited version of this using Tools. Create an external “zoom editor”, limit 8 notes per line, etc.

[00.1]

Just some quick thoughts on “parameter collection”.

Testing this idea out on 2.8.1 and its quite feasible and organized via track groups and using several tracks inside this group as “collection per section of song”.

I’m surprised working this way has not hit me, I’ve been using the Hydra to control all my gain, wet, dry, basically almost anything to do with loudness, why not effects.

I guess in my mind I found the eight pattern command column to be more alluring and easier to deal with rhythmically than the one automation lane…

I’m going to give this a go and see how it works out: Hydra and track groups as “parameter collection per section of song”.

[00.1]

@00.1

@00.1

Also not sure what the looping thing means - you imagine a new feature, something a bit like the clip arranger?

Yes, something like the clip arranger. Not that I have a problem with the current aliases feature but I can’t define what is an alias.

For example, same rhythm pattern different notes. I cannot alias the rhythm pattern alone.

The rhythmic clip pattern maybe short and looped but the notes are changing and never the same for a period of time.

Being able to define what to alias could be useful but it could also be conducive to “digging yourself a hole you can’t get out of”. It depends I guess…
I used to label patterns in so many dimensions that it started to become way too long of a string of dimensions.
I didn’t want to read a paragraph in what makes pattern 02 different from pattern 04.

For example: Pattern 02 is similar to pattern 04 to about 90% with a few interval and note differences, I will not label every single dimension that differentiate it from each other. If pattern 02 is different from pattern 04, I should already know the total dimensions “that I like to work with” in music. Basically the way Renoise works now is fine. I just wanted to express this thought as a matter of personal organization.

[danoise]

@00.1

I’m surprised working this way has not hit me, I’ve been using the Hydra to control all my gain, wet, dry, basically almost anything to do with loudness, why not effects.

I guess in my mind I found the eight pattern command column to be more alluring and easier to deal with rhythmically than the one automation lane…

It really is interesting. Textual representations of music (notes, fx commands) are good for representing “events”, whereas graphical envelopes are good for “values”. And color could be viewed as yet another layer of information.
Personally, I tend to favor the “event” type view - e.g. by trying to avoid using envelope automation as much as possible, as the custom LFO envelope can often replace it and thus be trigged with just a few “reset events”.

Just to revisit the idea of a parameter collection: for me, it’s supposed to solve a number of “problems”

First of all, it should make it obviously which parameters are related to each other. This is, or can be, a problem sometimes when I have been away from a track for a while.
Also, sometimes the musical ideas in a song are not that obvious before you hear them. A collection could make this structure more obvious, making the music more “readable” (but this is obviously highly subjective).

Finally, it’s also about convenience: having the parameter right next to each other saves you from having to scan through X number of tracks to look for something - even if you know where a given parameter is located in a complex song of yours, looking at e.g. the mixer can sometimes be quite overwhelming

@00.1

I just wanted to express this thought as a matter of personal organization.

I’m doing the same thing - it would take someone else to say we are totally off-topic

[00.1]

@danoise

It really is interesting. Textual representations of music (notes, fx commands) are good for representing “events”, whereas graphical envelopes are good for “values”. And color could be viewed as yet another layer of information.
Personally, I tend to favor the “event” type view - e.g. by trying to avoid using envelope automation as much as possible, as the custom LFO envelope can often replace it and thus be trigged with just a few “reset events”.

Just to revisit the idea of a parameter collection: for me, it’s supposed to solve a number of “problems”

First of all, it should make it obviously which parameters are related to each other. This is, or can be, a problem sometimes when I have been away from a track for a while.
Also, sometimes the musical ideas in a song are not that obvious before you hear them. A collection could make this structure more obvious, making the music more “readable” (but this is obviously highly subjective).

Finally, it’s also about convenience: having the parameter right next to each other saves you from having to scan through X number of tracks to look for something - even if you know where a given parameter is located in a complex song of yours, looking at e.g. the mixer can sometimes be quite overwhelming

I’m doing the same thing - it would take someone else to say we are totally off-topic

TAS Pipe Dream NES in 3:57 by Explosion Pills

Just as a feature joke suggestion, the ability to “print” a schematic of complex routes or grid style signal flow like the youtube Pipe Dream video.

Back to thoughts on parameter collection and 2.8.1, I may exchange the Hydra and use the XY meta device instead since the visuals gives more of an immediate description of modulation range. I imagine it is also “event” friendly since I can take 4 XY devices and use two tracks to express the modulations in “events” but still connected to one device on a send track for example. The Hydra will still get some use but maybe more on signal following and meta mixing.

[00.1]

@danoise

I’m doing the same thing - it would take someone else to say we are totally off-topic

Here for another round of off the beaten path commentary on the mixer, mostly about the subject of perspective.

Generally when I make music, I like to maintain this out of body like experience
where my mind is in one place and my body in a room translating that other world into Renoise.

Its interesting and contradictory to work in this manner,
the mind full to the brim with depths of field while staring at the computer with little to no depth of field.

Still scratching my head on how to fit the idea of perspective in the mixer…

Kubrick // One-Point Perspective

[00.1]

Just a quick log in the fire for “parameter collection”.

I’ve been scoping out drububu.com’s tutprials on pixel art…

Never really checked out the rest of the site until recently - came across some interesting visuals…

“Rectangle Packing Problem”: http://www.drububu.com/miscellaneous/packingproblem/index.html

Click on the numbers 4 - 32… looks like different combinations of rectangles, you could also keep on clicking the same number for a different result.

[00.1]

early draft…

new draft moved to: https://forum.renoise.com/t/machine-view-like-buzz-tracker/32210

[00.1]

moved: https://forum.renoise.com/t/machine-view-like-buzz-tracker/32210

[danoise]

Woa, nice picture but now we are definitely offtopic - there is a topic dedicated to something very close to what you have in mind :

Machine View Like Buzz Tracker?

I’ve been a long time user of Buzz Tracker, and have recently purchased Renoise. While I’m finding Renoise to be overall much better, one thing I miss about Buzz was the machine view page that allowed you to route synths and effects,…this allowed me to get really crazy with routing and you could easily see where things were going in the “web”…would something like this be possible in Renoise? (only program I’ve seen with something similar is Reaktor) here is a screenshot:

Basically, I have envisioned the same approach to routing

[Santino (causticlimax)]

I love this idea!!! MICRO EDITS without having to go to Ableton or Breaktweaker.

[Chris_Edberg]

This perhaps have been brought up before in this topic, but I imagine both zoom in and out ability!

Zoom OUT to get a better overview of the pattern from start to finish, without being forced to scroll up and down.

Zoom IN to be able to - for instance - insert pattern effect command ”between the lines”, without the need to change the tempo/LPB and reconstruct the whole project. (Actually I believed the second mentioned featurewas actually implemented some years ago[???], but I could be wrong/not able to find it.)

[justinf]

I love this concept. I only recently realised how useful it would be to me. I like to use 16 LPB with 128 lines pattern length and 1 TPL, so i can’t ever see the whole pattern. A zoom out feature would be massively helpful like image in the post above or that revisit thing.

My number 1 wish for new features to be added.

[Chris_Edberg]

Wasn’t this topic pinned before? Is the feature implemented?