Search | Statistics | User Listing Forums


Forums supporting
reViSiT (http://revisit.info)
and MIVI (http://mivi.nashnet.co.uk)
nashNET Forums ->  reViSiT - Tracking Software for VST hosts -> Testing & Development -> View Thread

You are logged in as a guest. ( logon | register )

FEATURE: Clear feature / Default Pattern Size
Jump to page : 1
Now viewing page 1 [25 messages per page]
View previous thread :: View next thread
   reViSiT - Tracking Software for VST hosts -> Testing & DevelopmentMessage format
 
fegi
Posted 2007-07-12 12:31 PM (#13940)
Subject: FEATURE: Clear feature / Default Pattern Size



Veteran

Posts: 102
100
Location: Austria
2 things i think of at the moment:

what i actually miss is a "zap button" where you can choose if you want to delete:

- all pattern data (notes & orderlist) - which also resets the pattern size to default
- all samples
- all instruments
- everything

and the other thing would be a possibility to set a default pattern size for the whole song.

greetings,

fegi
Bookmark and Share Top of the page Bottom of the page
CS_TBL
Posted 2007-07-12 12:46 PM (#13941 - in reply to #13940)
Subject: Re: two simple but (imho) useful feature requests



Expert

Posts: 512
500
Location: Netherlands
Yes, the latter feature would be so nice for 6/8 3/4 -any- songs. Apart from default length, also default highlighters then eh.

Or perhaps a bit more detailed: give a start and end pattern for the default lengths/highlighers, as one could have a lengthy 3/4 part followed by a lengthy 5/4 part.. who knows..
Bookmark and Share Top of the page Bottom of the page
lackluster
Posted 2007-07-12 1:40 PM (#13943 - in reply to #13941)
Subject: Re: two simple but (imho) useful feature requests


Regular

Posts: 50
2525
Location: helsinki
CS_TBL - 2007-07-12 2:46 PM

Yes, the latter feature would be so nice for 6/8 3/4 -any- songs. Apart from default length, also default highlighters then eh.

Or perhaps a bit more detailed: give a start and end pattern for the default lengths/highlighers, as one could have a lengthy 3/4 part followed by a lengthy 5/4 part.. who knows..


if this could be taken further so that one could have looping patterns, that are "layered over" to a normal pattern, thus leading for say extremely detailed drumpatterns at a specific speed, but then a divided speed for merely putting on pads that tend to be heaps larger for longer things than a 128row drumpattern.

if i could have that drumpattern (of any length) looping, whilst on another channel, pads are being toggled at sspecific speed, or even a 16row drumbeat and a 192row pad but with a divided tempo

all that would be wick.
a way to really break out of the pattern limitations and be able to overview all patterns by just scrolling around and dividing it into bits.

think of how it would be to be able to edit songs when you could see all of the patterns zoomed out to a specific fidelity - so that one could really have control over multiple pattern long pads etc. this type of thing is what would make sense to have, and then be able to toggle on top of that other midiloops/assigned blocks in F2 as playable note-togglable things.

i must say i am very impressed at how revisit handles, now that im looking at it again.
Bookmark and Share Top of the page Bottom of the page
CS_TBL
Posted 2007-07-12 2:01 PM (#13944 - in reply to #13943)
Subject: Re: two simple but (imho) useful feature requests



Expert

Posts: 512
500
Location: Netherlands
hm.. not sure whether I get the point.. is it something like this (future concept, tho hopefully not *very* future :P)?

http://www.nashnet.co.uk/english/revisit/conceptual_1.jpg
Bookmark and Share Top of the page Bottom of the page
lackluster
Posted 2007-07-13 9:00 AM (#13946 - in reply to #13944)
Subject: Re: two simple but (imho) useful feature requests


Regular

Posts: 50
2525
Location: helsinki
CS_TBL - 2007-07-12 4:01 PM

hm.. not sure whether I get the point.. is it something like this (future concept, tho hopefully not *very* future :P)?

http://www.nashnet.co.uk/english/revisit/conceptual_1.jpg


something like that, but coupled with a midisequencer looper
(think a 16 row pattern, but looping in a sequencer, even if you have a 192row pattenr, the 16 row pattern will keep looping in it, and any edits of that channel make an automatic copy of it, so i could say have a 4 row beat looping for 128rows, but when i go to the channel the 4 row beat is on, and to say row 120, and edit it, an automatic copy is made, and thus "looping is halted". this would make things very quick, because one could enlarge the 4 row beat to a 8row beat or further, and it would still loop the way it is supposed to (i.e. constantly play the length of the "pattenr" that loops, inside another pattern)
thus one could hatch patterns together, and eventually end up with ways of having a 10sec drumpattern and a 180sec pad with both interlocking, instead of having to create patterns oneself.

i know this is where trackers can go -- and a jam-layer on top of it with capture-last-take too.
Bookmark and Share Top of the page Bottom of the page
CS_TBL
Posted 2007-07-13 9:24 AM (#13947 - in reply to #13946)
Subject: Re: two simple but (imho) useful feature requests



Expert

Posts: 512
500
Location: Netherlands
Dunno whether that's going to be in it, as it's different from the basic architecture of tracker pattern editors (which is just a large grid on a timeline where one can edit everything). A solution could be to extend the instrument data with -as it's called in softsynths- an arpeggio of x steps. Then you only put a start note in the patterns each -say- 16 steps, and it plays the -assumingly- 16-step arpeggio then. I think that would be a more logical solution within the context of trackers. It's not up to me to code it or agree/disagree with it tho. :P
Bookmark and Share Top of the page Bottom of the page
lackluster
Posted 2007-07-14 10:24 AM (#13950 - in reply to #13947)
Subject: Re: two simple but (imho) useful feature requests


Regular

Posts: 50
2525
Location: helsinki
CS_TBL - 2007-07-13 11:24 AM

Dunno whether that's going to be in it, as it's different from the basic architecture of tracker pattern editors (which is just a large grid on a timeline where one can edit everything). A solution could be to extend the instrument data with -as it's called in softsynths- an arpeggio of x steps. Then you only put a start note in the patterns each -say- 16 steps, and it plays the -assumingly- 16-step arpeggio then. I think that would be a more logical solution within the context of trackers. It's not up to me to code it or agree/disagree with it tho. :P


ok, programmable arpeggio-pattern that is independent of song speed or resolution.
once i can use S76 to hatch those programmable arpeggiopatterns, that could even be 192 rows long.. well!
!!
Bookmark and Share Top of the page Bottom of the page
fegi
Posted 2007-07-29 6:40 PM (#13958 - in reply to #13941)
Subject: Re: two simple but (imho) useful feature requests



Veteran

Posts: 102
100
Location: Austria
CS_TBL - 2007-07-12 1:46 PM

Yes, the latter feature would be so nice for 6/8 3/4 -any- songs. Apart from default length, also default highlighters then eh.

Or perhaps a bit more detailed: give a start and end pattern for the default lengths/highlighers, as one could have a lengthy 3/4 part followed by a lengthy 5/4 part.. who knows..


yes...that would be very useful. nothing more, nothing less
Bookmark and Share Top of the page Bottom of the page
chrisnash
Posted 2007-08-01 5:45 PM (#13981 - in reply to #13958)
Subject: Re: two simple but (imho) useful feature requests



Developer

Posts: 746
50010010025
Location: England
There's definitely a call for the New / Zap feature.

It'd also be nice to have an editing feature for changing highlights, lengths, etc. for more than one pattern, so I'll look into that at some point. I think Esa and I talk about a paste feature that just pasted the parameters in the Pattern Options screen (highlight, length, etc.) from one pattern to another. One hope when I started the project was to be able to derive the highlighting from the time-signature changes in the host, but this looks like it might be cumbersome.

As mentioned before, the Order List is pretty basic as regards arranging, so there's plenty of scope for improvement. The previously discussed Pattern Zoom and MIDI-triggering of patterns largely capture the functionality you're describing, but they're a way off. Being able to abstract phrases into 'notes' (i.e. have note-triggered arpeggios) is a nice thought, but again a way off.

'Hope this helps,
Chris
Bookmark and Share Top of the page Bottom of the page
Jump to page : 1
Now viewing page 1 [25 messages per page]
Jump to forum :
Search this forum
Printer friendly version
E-mail a link to this thread

(Delete all cookies set by this site)