It won’t bypass the need of more micro controllers and envelopes because these predefined presets will be controlled by micro dials inside Shape and after which user can manually manipulate the setting
Yes…They don’t .
Taking an example of Nugget which is a kind of Pluck
in which ADSR Release Envelope is routed to Shape Dial whereas Decay Envelope is routed to Lowpass Dial and that’s why u hear plucky sound while decreasing the amount in Lowpass Dial
So it’s kind of very tricky to implement ADSR in such situation
- Developer has to redesign each and every sound again to fit in ADSR
- Developer just adds more micro controllers, Envelopes(Amp, Filter) to Shape Dials
I’m using stereo widener and stereo expander interchangeably. Maybe that’s incorrect.
If a true stereo widener/expander control isn’t a practical challenge, then the existing Offset mechanic could possibly be duplicated for use as a quick n dirty stereo widener.
Duplicate the existing Offset mechanism, calibrate it so it scales between 1-40 milliseconds, have it effect only the left or right channel (user selectable). Slap a Stereo Width label on the control and you’ve got a quick n dirty, but effective, stereo widener without the need to update any library patches.
Re: ‘Tremolo’ (and ‘Vibrato’)
I say we go with the correct definitions. None of that Fender nonsense.
Tremolo > modulated amplitude
Vibrato > modulated pitch
Thanks for the breakdown. I hadn’t fully followed the exchanges on the topic, so…
(Short of a exhaustive engine and library rewrite… Of those solutions mentioned, I feel like your solution, @TheRealJFalc, would give us the most ADSR-like control and flexibility.
Lenberg’s proposal seems pragmatic, but would mean many sounds being beyond/beneath that type of control, making support for ADSR-like control a bit patchy and potentially turning many sounds into 2nd-class sounds.)
It’s certainly a difficult situation. I’m sure they recognise and appreciate the opportunity that more ADSR/ADSR-like control would offer.
I can certainly sometimes be a bit glib in how ‘easy’ the decision should be. I’m not the one up to my elbows in the current engine code. The pathway from knowing what’s right and doing what’s right can seem simple and straightforward to an onlooker, such as myself.
I’m certainly hopeful that they take on the challenge.
I think that my solution would unfortunately call for an entire library rewrite, at least a few sounds would end up completely different due to the way they work. Having the ability to apply different “shape” controls as suggested could also be a solution that could theoretically accomplish this though. Although personally i’d prefer full control, it is the only solution that does not add additional sliders, which in the terms of Auxy’s design seems to be the most important thing. It also could possibly be the most difficult to implement, as it would require a lot of coding to simulate and test. But it would be the one that keeps the ideals in check. Possibly the one worth pursuing?
I’m curious how you can speak so definitively?
Do you have access to the sound engine?
From the pictures I’ve seen:
It looks like a ‘stereo expander’ already exists, as well as the ability to route an oscillator to an envelope…?
Well Keep in mind community … I work hard and talk less
Whatever I post is related to Auxy’s Future Development and for the welfare of Auxy Community
So Always Trust Me whatever I say related to Auxy and Please Don’t Judge Me and Don’t Argue with Me
You might want to dial it back a bit.
(Coming from me, you can trust that advice.)
It would good if you explain your role regarding Auxy.
Are you an active contributor to the app/code?
Also, it would be good hear about your experience making a sound pack.
Which one did you make?
It was a while back, but it’s not an official soundpack. Like the man added in his own soundpack on his device. Pretty impressive actually (and quite surprised by the devs not having any comment on it too)
Well Sure I would like to tell If All the Community members are interested in it
By the way, The Sound Packs that I’ve made are for my own purposes. I’ve not even discussed about it with the Developers. But I will happily handover my Soundpacks to Developer after Auxy 6.0 is out and if they shows any interest on it
What if you were able to adjust modifiers for instruments from the “Rearrange Instruments” menu?
You could rename it to “Manage Instruments”.
Don’t know if this has already been said (and I’m only suggesting this because I’m lazy) but maybe when you create a project, if you are viewing a tag when you create it there could be an option to automatically save it into the tag you are viewing? Just like on google drive if you create a file in a folder, it gets saved into that folder. Again, this HD only because I’m lazy and can’t be bothered to organise it myself but it’s just an idea.
There should be an option to make a loop 3 bars, or 6 bars, or 5, or 7, rather than only common time bars. What would be REALLY great is if there was some way to completely customize the time signature in each loop and scene, making it possible to have poly-rhythmic scenes. Maybe have a pop up menu for each scene where you could customize the time signature to whatever you want (3/4, 5/4, 7/8, 9/8, 11/8 15/16, 21/32, so on and so forth). This might be an addition that very few users will use or even notice (I don’t know what kind of music everyone else makes), and I’m not sure if this would be an easy addition or not. But either way it would make the actual beat lab much more versatile. Something that more complex musicians might enjoy.
I think the devs have already said their opinions for this piece and short is that it’s not something they want to pursue and think would be necessary because they aren’t super common.
At the moment, some menus feel a bit off.
5.2 added the reorder screen, but it feels kinda off. it’s just a list where users can reorder them. Imagine if you can change the color and name from that screen. Maybe everytime a note plays on that instruments, a dot flashes next to the name to indicate that that instrument is playing
Hardstyle kicks or Hardstyle TOKS.
How about the ability to view projects by multiple tags? Like if I want to view all of my projects that I tagged ‘Ambient’ but I only want to see the ambient tracks that I ALSO tagged as ‘Completed’ so that I don’t see ALL of my ambient tracks and I don’t see ALL of my completed tracks, but instead I only see my completed ambient tracks.
So pretty much just the ability to narrow down tag searches and not just see 1 tag. Not necessary, but it could be useful.
if we get those be prepared for the super KONGKONGKONGKONG