Reason 11 announced!!!

[Psuper]

I said 'randomness with control', not randomness. As I mentioned 'one map with discrete sections of layers would be ideal for the majority' should have clued you in if you actually understand the app and how the maps work at all.

"Randomness with control" would still mean some sort of randomness, of which there is none, so you were wrong, because you apparently just didn't get it - as usual. And as as usual you nonetheless head for the high road, accusing others (i.e. those who are VASTLY more knowledgeable than you regading the topic in question) of not having a clue. Oh the irony.

I engaged hotmits question because I had spent a couple days with the app learning it and shared my experience. Then someone comes in with the "You're wrong, I'm right" comment which I soundly address mimicking his same 'tone'. Then your trainwreck of a childish response pops in.

Only insecure people worry about if they're 'wrong' Jens, which is what you most certainly are often and obviously are now. I'd even bet the bank that you had no clue about the map and how it works (because the dragging around the map is the main 'randomness' part which doesn't have to be random), and only after I mentioned the discrete values on one map did you finally 'get it'. Then you pop in here for... for what reason precisely? People like you Jens, is the problem with these forums -- unprovoked attacking of an individual.

[jens]

[antic604]

Guys, let's agree that it's a matter of interpretation. It's not random, because the map has fixed, pre-made patterns scattered all over the place so it's always the same at the same spot and with those same settings, BUT it's random for the user because you can't really know for certain what you'll get at certain spot. It's not random in a sense that it's a surprise.

Good?

[Psuper]

Guys, let's agree that it's a matter of interpretation. It's not random, because the map has fixed, pre-made patterns scattered all over the place so it's always the same at the same spot and with those same settings, BUT it's random for the user because you can't really know for certain what you'll get at certain spot. It's not random in a sense that it's a surprise.

Good?

Thats not the argument. I gave good feedback without regurgitating my heaps and piles and unlimited amount of knowledge and wisdom... Regardless, I made it clear in a PM to take it to PM.

[jens]

And that I didn't answer your PM should have made it clear to you what I think of it....

[TheMaestro]

And that I didn't answer your PM should have made it clear to you what I think of it....

And you still instigate arguments like an 8 year old.
It’s a miracle you’re not permabanned.

[mholloway]

I said 'randomness with control', not randomness. As I mentioned 'one map with discrete sections of layers would be ideal for the majority' should have clued you in if you actually understand the app and how the maps work at all.

Yes, that's what you said: and it was 1. totally misleading and 2. incorrect. 'Randomness with control' suggests randomness is involved. It's not. At all. No randomness whatsoever in there. So saying it's "randomness with control' would convey to anyone who doesn't know otherwise that 'randomness' is involved. Which is wrong. Which is why I corrected you. Deal with it.

[TheMaestro]

Maybe Reason 12 will improve the userbase.

[Psuper]

I said 'randomness with control', not randomness. As I mentioned 'one map with discrete sections of layers would be ideal for the majority' should have clued you in if you actually understand the app and how the maps work at all.

Yes, that's what you said: and it was 1. totally misleading and 2. incorrect. 'Randomness with control' suggests randomness is involved. It's not. At all. No randomness whatsoever in there. So saying it's "randomness with control' would convey to anyone who doesn't know otherwise that 'randomness' is involved. Which is wrong. Which is why I corrected you. Deal with it.

Good for you. People can make up their own minds.

[deastman]

redrum2.jpgredrum.jpg

I’ve always thought that Redrum would make an awesome physical piece of hardware. Maybe just add internal sampling ability and per step probability, and off you go.

[Benutzername]

Building a real version was actually the main intention when I started the 3D modelling. But in the end I realized that there are already enough drum machines out there and I went down the modular rabbit hole instead.

[deastman]

Building a real version was actually the main intention when I started the 3D modelling. But in the end I realized that there are already enough drum machines out there and I went down the modular rabbit hole instead.

It’s definitely quite feasible these days if you build it around a Raspberry Pi. I know there are a lot of other similar devices out there, but I still think it would be pretty awesome.

[Johnny!]

I'm totally not amused with Beat Map - I mean, are people really that lazy nowadays, that they can't even be bothered to program their own drums? It's really easy (especially when compared to melodies for which some helping hand is often welcome)...

[Crossinger]

I mean, are people really that lazy nowadays, that they can't even be bothered to program their own drums? It's really easy

I don't know if people are getting "lazy", but I know some fellows who are excellent synth programmers, but totally fail with drums. Either they don't get much more than plain "boom tschak" or they use drum loops right away.

[hotmitts]

I spend hours trying to make drum tracks to match my guitar/bass etc but it often doesn't sit right, I can't quite 'get it'.