Help me with (Hive) Shape Sequencer. (How) can I make this shape?
-
- KVRist
- 333 posts since 1 Jun, 2005 from Zwolle, Netherlands
I am trying to figure out shape sequencer and somehow struggle to get some shapes I want. Could anyone maybe explain me how to create this shape (if it's possible):
[edit] it’s mainly about the sixth ramp that starts at an odd number (11). I don’t seem to be able to move a ramp in time like this because that would span two sequencer steps and starts with a flat line. I can make the 2nd half in step 7 but not the first in step 6. That would need to be a kind of cut in half ramp (vertical cut)
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
-
Super Piano Hater 64 Super Piano Hater 64 https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=491312 - KVRian
- 500 posts since 24 Jan, 2021
I haven't managed to do this with shape editors, but I tried it with the sequencer and it was pretty easy. Set the pattern length to 16 steps and the playback mode to Mod. Put mod values of 100 in steps 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 12, and 15; leave them at 0 elsewhere. Have a function generator follow the Seq Mod source, and assign its Env output to whatever you want to modulate. Leave attack at zero and increase decay according to your needs. In my test project I have it at 59.
Now, obviously you might already be using the sequencer (and that function generator) for other purposes. You might be able to do that with shape modulation instead. In the meantime, I'm gonna study the manual a little more and see if I can manage some trickery with time base modulation.
Now, obviously you might already be using the sequencer (and that function generator) for other purposes. You might be able to do that with shape modulation instead. In the meantime, I'm gonna study the manual a little more and see if I can manage some trickery with time base modulation.
I hate signatures too.
-
Super Piano Hater 64 Super Piano Hater 64 https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=491312
- KVRian
- 500 posts since 24 Jan, 2021
I got a little closer using only two shapes and two lanes. I put my saw wave on D and a 50% pulse wave on B, which runs at one fourth the speed of D (1/2 vs. 1/8). Then I used B to decrease Ratchet (D) and increase Rate (D). It sort of works, but it's very clumsy and I'm having a hard time getting it exactly right.
I hate signatures too.
-
- u-he
- 30213 posts since 8 Aug, 2002 from Berlin
I think it's possible with a bit of trickery. Instead of explaining it I'd probably prefer to make a preset. I just need to find the time to do it.
The issue is, it uses a 16 step grid, each saw using 2 steps, with the 6th saw being displaced by one step - but the Shape Sequencer only has 8 steps. I have an idea here, possibly using 2 Seqs and only 3 steps. Hope to be able to try tomorrow.
The issue is, it uses a 16 step grid, each saw using 2 steps, with the 6th saw being displaced by one step - but the Shape Sequencer only has 8 steps. I have an idea here, possibly using 2 Seqs and only 3 steps. Hope to be able to try tomorrow.
-
- u-he
- 30213 posts since 8 Aug, 2002 from Berlin
It came out a bit different with a quick and dirty attempt:
ShapeSeq A controls Position of ShapeSeq B in ModMatrix 1
The trick is to match the timing of the \\\\ in the first segment with the timing of \_ \_ \ spread over two and a half segments. That is, the first \\\\ needs to be as long as \_\_\. That's what happens in ShapeSeq A, between segment 6 for the \\\\ and 7 for the \_\_\
I've attached the preset, you might have to tweak it a bit for perfect timing. I just roughly matched the points in segments 6 and 7 on the trackpad of my laptop, which isn't my forté...
ShapeSeq A controls Position of ShapeSeq B in ModMatrix 1
The trick is to match the timing of the \\\\ in the first segment with the timing of \_ \_ \ spread over two and a half segments. That is, the first \\\\ needs to be as long as \_\_\. That's what happens in ShapeSeq A, between segment 6 for the \\\\ and 7 for the \_\_\
I've attached the preset, you might have to tweak it a bit for perfect timing. I just roughly matched the points in segments 6 and 7 on the trackpad of my laptop, which isn't my forté...
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 333 posts since 1 Jun, 2005 from Zwolle, Netherlands
Thank for the tips and you effort! I wouldn't have though of the way you did it Urs. Thanks for the preset (that name.. LOL)! It's good to see Hive is flexible enough to also create a rhythm like this. Still, with the shape sequencer it seems a bit cumbersome and loses some 'musicality' of the interaction. I agree the sequencer solution is more suited for this kind of rhythms, unfortunately without the ability to adjust envelopes per step. These timing and shaping things is often what makes these modulations come alive. Anyway, I was hoping I overlooked some simple(r) solution. Maybe in the future there could be an option to add shapes 'halfway' that also span the next step although that might not be the most elegant solution. Oh well for these rhythmic (monophonic) filter modulation there are always other tools I could add after Hive.
-
- u-he
- 30213 posts since 8 Aug, 2002 from Berlin
Yes, the obvious future solution is to be able to split a step into two, three or even four shapes. Another solution is to simply add variations to the step ratcheting option, for instance a "2/3/4 bit binary" one that hard switches between 4, 8 or 16 possible patterns to ratchet the base shape. This way one could easily create \__\, _\\_ or _\_\ by just scrolling through a set of preset patterns for each step.
Our concern always is to keep Hive simple and fun. A lot of flexibility gets lost by this, but then we would like to encourage people to explore alternative ways to do things. Nevertheless, the balance between "intuitive" and "riddle" is certainly something we're concerned with, too.
In the end, it is threads like this which show us real world examples of what people really want. I think this is what we need. Instead of "let's just make everything possible and bloat the software" we're like "let's see what they miss with the current feature set and maybe there's a way to make it possible without too much bloat".
I'll keep pondering over the issue.
Our concern always is to keep Hive simple and fun. A lot of flexibility gets lost by this, but then we would like to encourage people to explore alternative ways to do things. Nevertheless, the balance between "intuitive" and "riddle" is certainly something we're concerned with, too.
In the end, it is threads like this which show us real world examples of what people really want. I think this is what we need. Instead of "let's just make everything possible and bloat the software" we're like "let's see what they miss with the current feature set and maybe there's a way to make it possible without too much bloat".
I'll keep pondering over the issue.