Switchable diatonic limiter function in the Arpeggiator?

[bagginz]

Hello Urs,

given the fact that the arpeggiator has the advanced function of being able to programme notes as well as rhythmic patterns. Any chance of adding in a switchable diatonic limiter function?

What I mean is that once a sequence of notes has been programmed in to an arp, that patch is effectively limited to one key (signature), because it transposes the whole sequence in parallel. (Which admittely is alright for Giorgio Moroder impersonations, but is quite limiting otherwise)

What would add a lot more power and expand the useability of any one sequence would be to add some kind of note filter that limited the notes to a user definable scale.

For example:

As the arp is currently, let's say I programme a minor 7th chord into the arp (C, Eb, G, D) and I play the note C, and I'm working in C minor, I get a C min7th arpeggio. Cool. (I could also play F and G notes and still be diatonic to C min.)

But if I play a D note or Eb or Ab or other scale tones. I get notes outside the key that I'm working in. Furthermore, as they are transposed in parallel, the effect is that of a key change.

This effectively limits the arp function one sequence to be played back via one note (if the note function is set) when working inside a particular key.

Now, if I were able to choose to limit the notes to say, just the scale tones of Eb major/C minor, then playing sequences starting on other scale notes of Eb major would keep the notes being played back locked inside to that key/scale so that playing:

a D note would give me D, F, Ab, C (min7b5 arpeggio)

an Eb would give me Eb, G, Bb, Db ( Eb7th arpeggio)

an Ab would give an Ab maj7 arpeggio etc. etc.

And not just chord arpeggios, but those cleverly programmed riffs or scalar sequences which use all the slides and note length tricks in the arp would be transposed within the scale, adding much more playability and value to each patch which uses the arpeggiator.

Cheers,
bagginz

[amoeba]

this would be sweet. Numerology recently added something similar. this would be incredibly useful...

[sinzero]

a homophonic arp

[Urs]

(I'm just back home from a drinky thing, so bear with me)

Has anyone tried to create a .tun file where the "offending" notes within a scale are mapped towards more pleasant notes?

I'm still waiting for u-he *burp* to implement scripting for the microtuning tables. This would allow for easiest possible "force scale" for the arp...

Urs

[bagginz]

Has anyone tried to create a .tun file where the "offending" notes within a scale are mapped towards more pleasant notes?
Urs

I haven't personally.

In fact, I wouldn't have a clue how to go about that myself, being more of a musician than a programmer type.

However, with a bit of practice I can learn to handle on/off switches, as in: scale lock on / scale lock off

cheers,
bagginz

[pdxindy]

not that this substitutes what you are looking for, but you can use the step function in the arp to deal with some off notes and give more flexibility to the arp

[blurk]

Has anyone tried to create a .tun file where the "offending" notes within a scale are mapped towards more pleasant notes?
Urs

I haven't personally.

In fact, I wouldn't have a clue how to go about that myself, being more of a musician than a programmer type.

Well, I am a programmer type, and I looked into trying to do that once and I couldn't get my head around it. I don't exactly recall the stumbling block I had but I think either my music theory wasn't up to the task or it was just simply too difficult to "microtune" out of key notes so that they were in key and the essential "shape" of the arp was preserved. But maybe I was trying to overcomplicate things.

But the experience made me believe that for UI affordance, it's something that maybe shouldn't be pushed back on the users to sort out.

On the other hand, I can see an argument for part of the skill in using the arps is to figure out how to use them musically within their current constraints.

[bagginz]

Well, I am a programmer type, and I looked into trying to do that once and I couldn't get my head around it. I don't exactly recall the stumbling block I had but I think either my music theory wasn't up to the task

Hello Blurk,
perhaps if we combined our skills we could handle it

But requiring two people collaborate in order to use an arp function is why I completely agree with your statement below...

But the experience made me believe that for UI affordance, it's something that maybe shouldn't be pushed back on the users to sort out.

The other reason of course is that even if I did figure out how to do it, I probably wouldn't bother getting involved in all that left brain stuff while in the midst of being engaged in the (right brain) business of composing music, it would be too distructive to my creative frame of mind - which is usually already fragile enough...

I could however manage to click on a button on the arp GUI without losing my creative train of thought...

On the other hand, I can see an argument for part of the skill in using the arps is to figure out how to use them musically within their current constraints.

Why bother with playing skills when the machine is already doing all the donkey work of playing the notes anyway

But seriously, it's just that the arp (once in step sequencer mode) is quite limiting. I'm just suggesting freeing up that limitation.

__________________________


Just to clarify, let's make a distinction here:

The arpeggiator really becomes a 16 note step sequencer once the note choosing function is engaged.

While this function is not engaged, the arp functions as a normal arpeggiator and it's easy enough to use.

But once notes have been chosen as part of the pattern and the arp goes into defacto step sequencer mode then that patch's utility becomes quite limited. Good, but pretty much limited to just playing the pattern that was programmed in.

I'm suggesting that a "force scale(tm)" function as Urs calls it, would complement the step sequencer mode of the arp and would free up the limitation and expand that mode of the arp into a much more useful tool.

I see it as a corollary of including a note function into the arp in the first place.

For example, One could improvise and jam inside a key and come up with all kinds of interesting compositional ideas, rather than having the step sequencer just play back one preset pattern.

This is what I mean by expanding the utility of all the patches which have been programmed for Zerbra so far.

See McNoone's excellent new patch bank for example, which contains a large section of insanely complex patches tied to step sequencer patterns.

Cheers,
bagginz

[mcnoone]

Good, but pretty much limited to just playing the pattern that was programmed in.
Cheers,
bagginz

In many arps, you can use 2 or more keys down to alter the sequence too.
For example, using the Orchestra Stab preset from my presets, after changing to arpeggiator mode, you can start out 1 note down, then 2 notes down, an octave apart, then 4 notes, 2 notes an octave apart, and for each of those steps the sequence will sound different.
Then to change it further, go into the mod matrix section and there is 2 arp mods in there to tweak, to further alter the arp.
In a way, you can get many variations of an arp by how many keys are used, and certain key settings in the arp control section.

edit: The arp is going to give you a pattern, and you can alter it somewhat, as I explained above. If you want more random changing patterns you can use Lfo's set to user mode, and/or the MSEG's to have more variation. Then add some Lfo's set to random modulation for something closer to what (I think) your trying to achieve.

[bagginz]

In a way, you can get many variations of an arp by how many keys are used, and certain key settings in the arp control section.

Yes for sure. But diatonically?

Having the transposition be diatonic is the whole point of my suggestion.

btw superb presets Mcnoone!

cheers,
bagginz

[pdxindy]

But once notes have been chosen as part of the pattern and the arp goes into defacto step sequencer mode then that patch's utility becomes quite limited. Good, but pretty much limited to just playing the pattern that was programmed in.

I'm suggesting that a "force scale(tm)" function as Urs calls it, would complement the step sequencer mode of the arp and would free up the limitation and expand that mode of the arp into a much more useful tool.

Cheers,
bagginz

Hey bagginz

Have you tried working with the 'step' function in the arp? You can do a limited amount of 'force scale' using that along with transpose and playing multiple notes. I think it is one of the underused functions in the arp.

[mcnoone]

Yes for sure. But diatonically?
Having the transposition be diatonic is the whole point of my suggestion.
btw superb presets Mcnoone!
cheers,
bagginz

Oh. okay. Sounds like a good idea. Good luck with that.
Thanks, glad you like them.

[bagginz]

Have you tried working with the 'step' function in the arp?

Yes, for sure.

You can do a limited amount of 'force scale' using that along with transpose and playing multiple notes. I think it is one of the underused functions in the arp.

Judging by this, I'm not sure you understand what I'm suggesting.

Cheers,
bagginz

[Urs]

http://www.u-he.com/scripting/Arprestrictor.php

[Urs]

http://www.u-he.com/scripting/alwaysCMajor.tun <- puts your Arp into C Major
http://www.u-he.com/scripting/PentaCDFGA.tun <- pentatonic scale anyone?