Ok, so this is what I’m trying to achieve but I don’t know how.
I’d like to use one sample (e.g. saw-wave), but have e.g. 4 separate modulation sets for it:
pure, no volume/pitch/pan/filter envelopes
with some filter, resonance & drive tweaks to product an ‘accent’ (think TB-303 accents)
with vibrato added via LFO on pitch envelope
Is it possible to set it up so that it takes only one sample slot and I can switch the modulation sets (pure, accent & vibrato) by some pattern effect command? I read the manual but I can’t find it.
Why I want this is to be able to automate the filter cut-off (via InstrumentMacro) so that if I’m adjusting the cut-off it affects all those modulation sets in the same way: to have a melodic line in single track using different sounds (some pure, some with accent, some with vibrato) but when I move the cut-off (on instrument level, not the track FX level) it affects all of them.
Sorry, did some in-depth searching and I guess it’s not possible.
What I’m left with is using 3 separates samples and alter them in the track depending if I want the pure, accented or vibrating sound at given point. To automate it in a common manner I’d probably need to have 3 separate InstrumentMacro devices each connected to one of the instruments and then I could move them together with Hydra device. Quite cumbersome, but definitely doable
It is possible. Costs one macro to switch around. You need to copy the sample for each version, though. I copy samples all the time, it eats disk space and needs care to have them in sync, other than that its no deal and only ocd people should complain about it.
Set up the 3 sample copies to the desired 3 modulation sets.
Then you put a stepper device in multiply mode to the end of each modulation sets volume graph. Set it to point mode, step zero (this is important to set it to 0), size 3.
For the first set, set the 3 stepper points to “1.0, 0.0, 0.0”, for the 2nd “0.0, 1.0, 0.0”, you can guess the third.
Then map a free macro to the reset of each stepper. The macro will now enable set 1 from zero to 126, set 2 from 126 to 254, and set 3 at 255. You can guess you can have a 1/3rd range for the macro by using 4 points (size 4) and duplicating the third. Switching more than 3 sets is of course also very possible.
In the pattern you would automate an instrument macros device. If the values are too strange and cumbersome to set up, use a formula device to translate better values to the macro range.
It is possible. Costs one macro to switch around. You need to copy the sample for each version, though. I copy samples all the time, it eats disk space and needs care to have them in sync, other than that its no deal and only ocd people should complain about it.
Set up the 3 sample copies to the desired 3 modulation sets.
Then you put a stepper device in multiply mode to the end of each modulation sets volume graph. Set it to point mode, step zero (this is important to set it to 0), size 3.
For the first set, set the 3 stepper points to “1.0, 0.0, 0.0”, for the 2nd “0.0, 1.0, 0.0”, you can guess the third.
Then map a free macro to the reset of each stepper. The macro will now enable set 1 from zero to 126, set 2 from 126 to 254, and set 3 at 255. You can guess you can have a 1/3rd range for the macro by using 4 points (size 4) and duplicating the third. Switching more than 3 sets is of course also very possible.
In the pattern you would automate an instrument macros device. If the values are too strange and cumbersome to set up, use a formula device to translate better values to the macro range.
Cheers.
Thanks, but why would I want to do that if I already need to have the 3 separate instruments?
It seems more of a hassle than it’s worth it, but - again - thanks for feedback as this can be useful for other purposes
It is a too many crooked ways too rome to get lost in - problem?
I don’t know. With the stepper switching you can sequence the notes with a single instrument, while tweaking pattern or graph automation to switch sounds (instead of having to edit instrument numbers, which of course works just as well).
Another benefit would be to use common instrument fx chains.
No, obviously I appreciate the time & effort you put into figuring it out and writing it. I just hoped this would be more convoluted, e.g. just a simple track effect command.
