I've done the same with the snare, getting a "per-hit-tweakable-gate-effect".esteband wrote:This actually reminded me of one of the high points of my work on this competition.animehaus wrote:Or I could keep creating nice hat sounds
I ended up making my own hi hat patch for my track. It's nothing special, but I discovered a new technique that I think I'll use in the future. Rather than using two separate patches for closed and open, I just wrote 1 patch with a high sustain level and short decay & release times. To make the closed hi hats, I just painted in some really short notes, and for each hit of the open hi hat, I extended the note length a little longer. This way, I could program closed and open sounds on the same channel, with the same instance of eclipsis. Not only was it a little more efficient on CPU, but I also found it was so much more expressive in terms of groove. I could get a really nice push/pull feeling by selectively extending some open hi hat notes longer than others.
I used to achieve a similar effect by automating the decay times of my samples, but since i couldn't use samples this time... Plus I think that editing the MIDI notes not only makes it easier, but it gives you a visual cue that corresponds to the sound. IE you can actually hear what that longer-looking note sounds like.
Granted, there was still some "meat" missing from the sound of the Hi Hat, but I think if I used a synth with better envelopes and more ability to route velocity to various parameters, i could create a very tough sounding hi hat track.
-Steve
I also agree that being able to use velocity (as well as aftertouch, modwheel or other common MIDI CC) as source modulation for the filters, release, cutoff etc. will make you able to make a very expressive track by just drawing notes and few related parameters, bypassing the whole automation stuffs.
Is pretty old-school (Cubase 2.0 anyone?

