Arps in Synths

[zzz00m]

I think that an arp that follows the notes that you play, and not necessarily a sequencer, is an essential part of an instrument.

A sequencer plays a rigid pattern of notes, just like a MIDI track in a DAW. That part is a bit redundant. So yes, for arps!

[sjm]

In-built arps are nice if you want to play the synth live on a keyboard.

I'm prefectly happy to program my own arps in my DAW if I want an arp for a track I'm working on. I don't need to program that in the synth itself (or in a separate plugin). But for jamming live, the in-built ones are superior to having to load an external plugin.

[zzz00m]

if you want to play the synth live on a keyboard.

What a great idea!

Anyone who has not tried that yet should give it a shot. Not necessarily implying the need to play for a live audience. Just press the little black and white things. You might surprise yourself!

At any rate, that can be more fun than clicking on a piano roll or step sequencer with your mouse!

[vurt]

if you want to play the synth live on a keyboard.

What a great idea!

Anyone who has not tried that yet should give it a shot. Not necessarily implying the need to play for a live audience. Just press the little black and white things. You might surprise yourself!

At any rate, that can be more fun than clicking on a piano roll or step sequencer with your mouse!

is that what the black and white things under the knobs and sliders are for?

[Teksonik]

In-built arps are nice if you want to play the synth live on a keyboard.

You can still play the keyboard if you want to record Arps as well either as audio or into a piano roll.

Much faster than poking in notes with a mouse and a whole lot more satisfying at least for me.

[sjm]

You can still play the keyboard if you want to record Arps as well either as audio or into a piano roll.

Much faster than poking in notes with a mouse and a whole lot more satisfying at least for me.

I rarely bother recording the parts that way tbh. Given that the arp does most of the heavy lifting, it's not like you tend to have a gazillion notes to input, so I normally just click em in. Heck, a lot of the time it's either a one-key wonder part or a series of long sustained chords.

I will record my piano arpeggios though, but I ain't using an arp for that

[Teksonik]

One of the things I like to do with synths that have multiple Arps like Rapid or DUNE 3 is program two or more Arps with different rates or directions or set to random.

For example have one layer playing an octave down at 1/8 and another layer an octave up at 1/16. Then if the Arps allow it program in some rests. That makes for some very complex patterns when played from the midi keyboard and of course you can program the Filter to respond differently for different notes, have a delay effect set up to play off the Arps, have some layers bypass the Arps altogether, use note velocity as modulation etc etc.

I find having all that contained inside of a synth's patch very efficient.

[Teksonik]

I rarely bother recording the parts that way tbh. Given that the arp does most of the heavy lifting, it's not like you tend to have a gazillion notes to input, so I normally just click em in. Heck, a lot of the time it's either a one-key wonder part or a series of long sustained chords.
I will record my piano arpeggios though, but I ain't using an arp for that

In my opinion an arpeggiator is a musical instrument to be played in order to be appreciated. I've spent countless enjoyable hours just playing an arpeggiator going back to my hardware days.

It's not like you just hold down one note. The Arp responds to the notes it is given just like your piano responds to the notes it is given.

But if you prefer to manually place notes into the piano roll then that's great. Like I said we all have a different workflow.

On the subject of Sequenced patches let's say I program a series of 16 notes in the minor scale for example. I can trigger that sequence by holding down a note or entering a note in the PR until the sequence plays all the way through or I can feed that patch a series of shorter notes that only trigger part of the sequence. I find that can lead to some very interesting results.

But again that's just the way I like to work. Certainly it's not for everybody but all I know is every one of the synths in my top ten have some sort of built in Arp/Seq because I enjoy using them that much.

[Fraggle]

One of the things I like to do with synths that have multiple Arps like Rapid or DUNE 3 is program two or more Arps with different rates or directions or set to random.

For example have one layer playing an octave down at 1/8 and another layer an octave up at 1/16. Then if the Arps allow it program in some rests. That makes for some very complex patterns when played from the midi keyboard and of course you can program the Filter to respond differently for different notes, have a delay effect set up to play off the Arps, have some layers bypass the Arps altogether, use note velocity as modulation etc etc.

I find having all that contained inside of a synth's patch very efficient.

I am just testing Rapid (Demo version), and what you outline is exactly what I think it offers that is a bit different from other synths I have used. The polyrhythmic possibilities are very deep with this synth working on layers , like 8 synths stapled together.

[pdxindy]

Speaking of Arps...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOgBbSZae-k

[e-crooner]

Retrologue 2's arp/sequencer is pretty good, an entire page, not tiny and fiddly as in Sylenth1

[BONES]

In that example, all that randomisation could probably be added using the three random modulators. I made a modulator for exactly that purpose in SynthEdit - I called it the RARP, short for Random ARPeggiator - and used it in a number of my SE synths. It spat out random values, which were quantised to whole note values when applied to pitch. Simple but effective.

Liking a feature is the only reason to want it in a plugin.

I'd have thought having a use for it might be a better reason. I can't say, for example, that I "like" LFOs but every now and then (surprisingly rarely these days, I find) they can be useful.

Some people like microtuning in their synths and although I have no use for it I am capable of understanding the fact that they do and let them use their feature in peace.

Sure, that's easily ignored. But sometimes one person's idea of a useful feature gets in the way of how someone else likes to work. e.g. Some people like mod matrices but I find they tend to over-complicate workflows, whereas having your modulation knobs/sliders where they'll be applied, as is the case with Invader, makes a synth much easier/faster to work with.

It can't always be a case of live and let live, sometimes a request that will make one person happy will put someone else off. It's a juggling act for developers and I think those that do the best job are probably those with the strongest personal vision of what they want their product to be, as opposed to those who allow their product to be guided by the squeaky wheels. Of course, the most successful devs are probably those who get the balance between the two right.

[Tj Shredder]

I like having an ARP/SEQ in the actual VST, and one reason being it's easier to use it as a sound design tool, especially for more ambient patches. For example, using the sequencer in Pigments and making full use of the randomization options to create unpredictable sounds. Just gives me more options, and as noted, you can always use an external plugin as well (or together with it!).

You might like it, but nobody needs it, same with other fx especially reverbs. The argument to have it in a single preset isn’t too strong either, as that is a functionality your host should deliver (like in Bitwig).
I suspect its just for the sound designers which have to come up with sounds and sequences which sell the thing…
If I count presets a synth is coming with, I always have to subtract those with arps and sequences which often enough diminishes the useful presets by half or more…
A missing arpeggiator will never ever prevent you from using an arpeggiator. Your music gets done, its not a limitation at all…

[dfraze]

I think arps have their use in music.

They basically make a monotone sound more interesting without much effort.

Any movement and variation in a musical piece keeps the listener interested, so why not use an arp for that ?

[Teksonik]

I'd have thought having a use for it might be a better reason.

I'd have thought it would be obvious the reason one would like a feature is because they find it useful.

But sometimes one person's idea of a useful feature gets in the way of how someone else likes to work.

Sticking to the subject of this thread, having a built in Arp/Seq should not get in the way of how someone else likes to work since that feature can easily be ignored just like I can simply ignore microtuning or MPE capabilities. But even if one person doesn't want or need a feature someone else will. Some people won't buy a new synth unless it is MPE capable and since I have no such hardware I could not possibly care less if a synth has that feature but I can simply ignore it and so on.