i’m not here offering any tips or tricks, aside from the answers that may come to my question being useful to anybody else looking for the same.
i have no idea what the effect i’m looking for is called in ‘pro’-terms, but i’ll try and explain it.
i want a step-sequenced delay effect. with a normal delay, the note you play is just repeated at a certain rate with a certain release. that’s all nice, but what i want to do is have the repetition of the delayed note go faster, slower or random over time. so, to illustrate:
(Note is ‘N’, delays are ‘n’)
normal delay: N…n…n…n…n…
step-delay speed up: N…n…n…n…n…n.nn
step-delay slow down: N…n…n…n…n…n…n…n…n…
step-delay random: N…n…n…n…n…n…n…n…n…n…nnnn…n…n…n
i’m sure this is all clear.
now, does anyone know of a free vst that can do this?
i understand of course that i can ‘fake’ this in Renoise by just programming in my notes and using the volume column to silence them over time, and also that this gives me room for a meriad of other effects to apply to the sequence, but i have been looking for this effect forever and i am really wondering if anybody has any idea.
I believe the term you might be looking for is: multi-tap delay
I don’t know any good plug-in examples off the top of my head, but I’m sure there’s plenty to choose from on KVR if you search their database.
Edit: Actually maybe I’ve misunderstood you. I’m not too sure about adjusting the speed in the way you’re describing. Maybe you’re looking for more of a ‘bouncing ball’ type of delay effect? Maybe something like Bouncy by Bram @ Smartelectronix?
thanks for the quick replies. i looked through all the vstfx i already have, and found that ‘readelay’ can do what i want. it allows you to add as many taps as you want. so dblue is correct in saying the term is ‘multi-tap’. to be clear, i was not looking for an effect that does some sort of realtime switch with this stuff.
@CLAPZ: i have all those, and checked them out again to see if they are what i am looking for. the one that, from the description, should work the way i want it, is mashup, but it sounds like crap and does not do what i need it to do.
i just want my delay coupled with a step sequencer, really.
edit: @dblue: been searching KVR for multi-tap and that yielded some (i think) useful results. now have ‘roku’, which seems to work nicely. this guy’s other plugin crashed my Renoise though so was hesitant to use it, but all seems good with this one.
you could render a normal multi tap delay produced by renoise’s delay fx and then pitch shift it down/up over time. the notes of the taps would get lower/higher gradually though.
yeah, that’s an option i had not thought of yet. but i think if that was what i was looking for, i’d still use the ‘obvious’ option, just programming it into a pattern in Renoise directly, and applying the pitch to individual notes. having tried out several options today, the ‘pure Renoise’ option still seems the best one currently.
Audiodamage (of course) has a plugin that looks exactly the way i want it, and truthfully the way i want it is the way the Reason Reverb (Rv2000 i think?) used to do it… you can just specify for 5 taps where you want them to tap. the Audiodamage plug also has 5, and costs 50 bucks, so i’m not buying that however great it probably is, too much money for me right now. and, on top of that, i do not want a limitation on the amount of taps. if i wanna do 100 taps, i wanna do 100 taps, so to speak. Readelay still seems like the best option right now.
@CLAPZ: no problem thanks for the suggestion anyway, much appreciated. i do not have a particular song to use it in, have just been looking for a good method of doing this since i started making music. i used to make a lot of spaced out stoned-as-fuck tracks filled with strange sounds and weird rhythms, and a delay (or a repeated sample) that slows down over time or speeds up over time just sounds cool (imo), and adds to the strangeness often, because it goes off the rhythmic grid (i don’t sync that stuff). but, i might try and make you an example tonight, if i have the time.
Mutlitap is a bit different really. I have suggest some possible way of doing arithmetic delay calculations to solve other people’s similar problems in the past but would probably be a bit convolution for an actual effect really. may actual be more suited to a script and actually inserting each note into a pattern…
For extrapolation for anybody who might be interested thinking a equation box for Delay/X (repeats), Delay Modifier/Y and Decay/Z amount.
So Normal would be a delay of X with Y = 1.
Speed Up 0.5X (for halving, YX of anything where Y is less than one.)
Speed Down 2X
Decay/Z would be fractional (unless you wanted to be able to build up to max and stop) and have two modes. Per repeat or per X time. So a value of 1/2 could either half every time a note is replayed or every X amount of lines.
Anyway waffling now and would be a nicer thing to see in an effect, rather than fill out your pattern with the notes, but maybe somebody might find the idea interesting…
kazakore, i’m sure you are right, but honestly, even this stuff is too much math for me to understand. i would love to see it in a native effect, or someone make a tool out of it based on your suggestions.
i know it was called ‘multitap’ in Reason as well. made a screenshot.
first device is the RV7000 on the Multi-tap option, where i’d have 4 taps and each one shifting forward in time, so in effect slowing down the delay.
second device is the Redrum drum sequencer, where i’d just sequence my samples in a fast-to-slow pattern.
i also made an example (for CLAPZ specifically 'cause he asked for it) of a possible use for this effect. i did not do it with a delay, just in the pattern editor, and did not make it sound like a delay in the sense that it does not fade out. it does however demonstrate a speed-up and a slow-down repeat-effect applied to a sample. it’s here.
Don’t get me wrong, multi-tap is powerful and very useful and something I’d like to see, but as you see from your own image to get each delay spaced further apart you have to place each on further apart. So a 4-tap multi-tap delay could do a delay with four repeats, each getting quieter, but each would have a feedback of zero as to get the effect each would only be activated one, otherwise you would get a bouncing delay, which get louder on the repeats where more than one of the delays coincide with each other (which can of course be a very nice effect too and one I do favour.)
Native multi-tap in Renoise is a massive +1 from me! The mathematical type approach I mentioned is more to get some things that may seem quite simple in your head but at times can actually be hard to get working with a delay device. Probably wouldn’t be used by many…
yes, well noted. the feedback is indeed set to zero in that screenshot, for the obvious reason you mention: i’m not looking for that ‘bouncing delay’, but purely for, as i called it before and think is a more appropriate name, step-delay, or step-sequenced-delay. what i find kind of incredible is that i am having such a hard time finding a VST that does specifically this. the idea does not seem that far-fetched to me.
Now, i would be interested in creating a VST like this myself, only i do not know how to do that. i know i can use Synthedit, but it isn’t free, and i’m not paying money just to make this VST for myself. if anybody knows of another way to accomplish this (free VST-creating software available somewhere? maybe dblue is willing to do me a favor ?), i’d be glad to hear about it.
thanks for the example, it’s not quite what i want. check out my post above with my examples. i want to step-sequence the delay - so draw in each note of the delay myself, kinda like drawing them in the pattern editor and applying volume fx. only i’d like to have it through DSP/VST.
this also means i do not want it to repeat, so to speak. when i set up 1 delay device, line-synced with two different line-values, the effect approaches what i’m looking for, but it’s too ‘random’. just try and make a delay that slows down over time, or speeds up. that’s it.
Edit: [re-reading this, i urge you to not take offence of any kind. my words may register as harsh, they are not meant that way. i really appreciate all the help people give me on this, just hope i can get the idea across]
@netrunner: yes, that is very close. however, the delayed sound is still being pitched up/down, while what i’m looking for is just a slowing down of tempo, not sound.
@Jenoki: thanks for the VST’s. you’re right: i think they cannot do what i want. they are however really nice and i will find a use for the functions they do have (alot, from what i can tell!)
okay here’s another try.
The max value in the hydra device sets the relative delay for each echo. I made two examples: one that becomes faster and one that becomes slower.
And don’t worry about offending me, I can take a batter.
ok, can’t seem to get to the 2nd file. maybe something to do with mediafire having download times set (ie. wait for 3 mins and try again) but i don’t get the message so it’s unclear.
HOWEVER.
i got the 1st one, and that is exactly what i am talking about. i’d like to congratulate you on building this DSP chain as it looks pretty complex, but moreover anyone checking this out should look at mixer view when you play it, as that is where you can see what is going on, and it gives a really pretty effect. you routed each delay to a seperate send with a hydra setting the delay value, and that chained (if i understand correctly). in the mixer view, you get a sort of animation, as each channel peaks when a delay is hit, and it looks really nice.
quite an intricate workaround for something quite so simple in theory, don’t you think? again, thanks for this, great stuff!
You can’t do a propper multi-tap with native DSPs in Renoise. At least not in a comfortable way with some basic usability. The correct way to do something similar is indeed what Kazakore already pointed out, by adding zero-feedback delays, one for each tap.
As soon as you put them into one queue, feeding one tap with the other, the problem is, once you decreased the delay time in one of the taps, all follow ups will only repeat the shortened signal, with a maximal lenght of the till then shortest delay. Another point is, each output of a tap can only be a substractive result of the former delay, but not of the original signal. In fact that’s only ONE variation of real multi-tap setup. But it’s only a small part of what a real multi-tap is capable of. Creating a REAL multi-tap would be way more complicated.
Gooze’s examples work like the Variation described above. Though they’re way overkill with using a seperate channel for each tap. You can do the same for unlimited taps within only two channels:
All you have to do is queue all delays in one channel (#1), muting all their sources. Put a send after each delay, send its output to an empty channel (#2) and pass the signal to the next delay. The source of the last send in the queue has to be muted. That’s it. Of course you can put all the filter-stuff or whatever between the taps, just like in Gooze’s example. You just have to make sure the send is always the last device for each tap.
Cheers,
-BA
Edit: When I find the time, I’m gonna upload an example.
well, thanks a lot for the reply. i’ve tried to do the chained delays in the past but never got it quite right, probably because of the constraints you mention. i’ll check out your example when you’ve found the time.
by the way, i would like to point out that thought Gooze’s example may have been overkill with the channels, i still like it for it’s aestethic qualities. just play a note and look at the mixer. just look at it.
?), i’d be glad to hear about it.
