Bazille 2 feature suggestions

[pdxindy]

For per-voice distortion, try a filter.

Ain't quite the same as all the per-voice distortion options in Repro-5, surely

Different of course - but does it matter?

No, it doesn't matter... I can do per voice distortion now by using multiple instances. It's a convenience to have it built in (along with even 1 modulation option)

[operator]

For per-voice distortion, try a filter.

Ain't quite the same as all the per-voice distortion options in Repro-5, surely

Different of course - but does it matter?

No, it doesn't matter... I can do per voice distortion now by using multiple instances. It's a convenience to have it built in (along with even 1 modulation option)

The oscillators in Bazille can be used as waveshapers... and they give you a lot of creative Distortion FX... You got a whole lot of options to shape the Distortion... it gives you the different oscillator waves and wave-combinations, you have the TapMap and Fractal shaping options... ALSO you could use multiple waveshapers in series or paralell...

You can use it post-filter aswell as pre-filter... the only downside is you need balance the input level/mod amount sometimes because it is a very "dynamic" Distortion.. can be bad but also good, depends on the usecase...

For me personally, the Bazille Osc and the mentioned waveshaping method is one of the most fun things to do in software-synth-land... especially when introducing audiorate-modulation to the phase-distortion amount when using the Osc as waveshaper... unlike any other Distortion... it is SOOOO much fun!


Also the rectifier, lag, quantizer (bitcrusher) and sample&hold (downsampler) can be used as Distortion... in my opinion Bazille includes already a lot of per-voice distortion methods.. But I always welcome new additions to Bazille and wouldn´t turn down a new per voice distortion module...

[pdxindy]

For per-voice distortion, try a filter.

Ain't quite the same as all the per-voice distortion options in Repro-5, surely

Different of course - but does it matter?

No, it doesn't matter... I can do per voice distortion now by using multiple instances. It's a convenience to have it built in (along with even 1 modulation option)

The oscillators in Bazille can be used as waveshapers... and they give you a lot of creative Distortion FX... You got a whole lot of options to shape the Distortion... it gives you the different oscillator waves and wave-combinations, you have the TapMap and Fractal shaping options... ALSO you could use multiple waveshapers in series or paralell...

You can use it post-filter aswell as pre-filter... the only downside is you need balance the input level/mod amount sometimes because it is a very "dynamic" Distortion.. can be bad but also good, depends on the usecase...

For me personally, the Bazille Osc and the mentioned waveshaping method is one of the most fun things to do in software-synth-land... especially when introducing audiorate-modulation to the phase-distortion amount when using the Osc as waveshaper... unlike any other Distortion... it is SOOOO much fun!


Also the rectifier, lag, quantizer (bitcrusher) and sample&hold (downsampler) can be used as Distortion... in my opinion Bazille includes already a lot of per-voice distortion methods.. But I always welcome new additions to Bazille and wouldn´t turn down a new per voice distortion module...

It is so much fun! and your stated reasons are some of why Bazille is my favorite synth (hardware or software)

Still, sometimes I have a sound I like and it is fast and easy and predictable to enable the distortion and dial in the desired result. I wouldn't want to lose the current global FX, just to add a per voice option for when I don't want the intermodulation effect.

And yeah, I can happily live without it.

[Blogbert]

No, it doesn't matter... I can do per voice distortion now by using multiple instances. It's a convenience to have it built in (along with even 1 modulation option)

Out of curiosity, how do you manage your multiple instances?

Obviously I know how to use multiple instances duplicate a monophonic Bazille preset thereby gaining per-voice distortion, assuming I had no desire to change any of the synth's parameters.

But, how would you distribute the notes in a polyphonic preset between the instances? And/or, how would you manipulate the controls on all the instances at the same time? Is there some nifty Bitwig trick?

[pdxindy]

No, it doesn't matter... I can do per voice distortion now by using multiple instances. It's a convenience to have it built in (along with even 1 modulation option)

Out of curiosity, how do you manage your multiple instances?

Obviously I know how to use multiple instances duplicate a monophonic Bazille preset thereby gaining per-voice distortion, assuming I had no desire to change any of the synth's parameters.

But, how would you distribute the notes in a polyphonic preset between the instances? And/or, how would you manipulate the controls on all the instances at the same time? Is there some nifty Bitwig trick?

Use a Bitwig Instrument Selector (3.2 and up) which has a round robin mode to distribute notes across layers.

If you setup a preset page for the Instrument Selector with one Bazille instance and set up the parameters you want modulated by the macro knobs, then duplicate the Bazille instance, adjusting the macros will adjust all duplicated instances. That is the way to adjust all instances at once.

Besides allowing per voice distortion, it also allows one to use Bitwig modulators to modulate the distortion per voice. Works well with aftertouch for example.

Another cool aspect of the setup, if you play and hold a note on a Linnstrument (or other MPE controller), then play another note, the first note still responds to pitch, pressure and timbre.

Bitwig and Bazille are awesome together with a Linnstrument!

[david.beholder]

I think: Mute or Solo oscillators and extended sequencer with 2 lanes, independent lengths and some arp/seq/scale features.
Also some why click and enter value doesn't work on Taps.

[mrj1nx]

This might make it too complicated but Ive many times wished that I could scale/modify signals per cable endpoint. So a cable could potentially have a DC offset & scale knob plus a function that can modify the signal. This could open up alot of possibilities and save alot of patching, but the UX might suffer too much for it to be worth it. Another thing Id like is to have the FX as part of the patching. A patchable delay buffer could be quite cool with some controls for speed and lenght.

[pdxindy]

This might make it too complicated but Ive many times wished that I could scale/modify signals per cable endpoint. So a cable could potentially have a DC offset & scale knob plus a function that can modify the signal. This could open up alot of possibilities and save alot of patching, but the UX might suffer too much for it to be worth it.

Maybe a right click could popup a small window with those controls... out of sight otherwise, but there when needed. Would be cool to have a small curve editor that way

[CrystalWizard]

This might make it too complicated but Ive many times wished that I could scale/modify signals per cable endpoint. So a cable could potentially have a DC offset & scale knob plus a function that can modify the signal. This could open up alot of possibilities and save alot of patching, but the UX might suffer too much for it to be worth it.

Maybe a right click could popup a small window with those controls... out of sight otherwise, but there when needed. Would be cool to have a small curve editor that way

I don’t yet have Bazille, but, this is a great idea IMO and would be great to have on all my modulars. I had occasionally added pots, splitters, switches, offset voltages on cables in my hardware modulars but it was too cluttered and added a bit of complexity (and wires) that were not helpful in live performances.

[Blogbert]

This might make it too complicated but Ive many times wished that I could scale/modify signals per cable endpoint. So a cable could potentially have a DC offset & scale knob plus a function that can modify the signal. This could open up alot of possibilities and save alot of patching, but the UX might suffer too much for it to be worth it. Another thing Id like is to have the FX as part of the patching. A patchable delay buffer could be quite cool with some controls for speed and lenght.

Like you suggest, I think modifying signals per cable might be too confusing; it would make it harder to see what is going on in a patch just by looking at it. Pdxindy suggested a context menu, which I believe would also suffer from these visibility issues - you'd have to do a bunch of right-clicking just to make sense of even a basic patch. Also, if there is a right-click context menu, I think it should be devoted to selecting the colour of your cables. That would save me lots of time of scrolling through colours, and accidentally deleting cables by clicking too fast! Back to your idea however, I haven't had any pressing need to add DC or scale, but, as a way to avoid the visibility concerns, maybe there could be little plugs or couplers that you plug into inputs in front of cables, with mini-knobs to adjust their scale: a +5V coupler and so on.

As for your suggestion of patchable FX, I would love that.

[MitchK1989]

at the risk of making my cpu go boom a patchable delay line (with external feedback loop possibilities) that could go all the way from looper-ish territory down to karplus-strong territory would be amazing.

[pdxindy]

at the risk of making my cpu go boom a patchable delay line (with external feedback loop possibilities) that could go all the way from looper-ish territory down to karplus-strong territory would be amazing.

+1