User Details

Username: braduro
Website: None provided
Facebook: None provided
Twitter: None provided
Soundcloud: None provided
Account Status: enabled
Member since: Sep 16 2013
About braduro:
(report this profile)

Devices by braduro

No devices have been posted by this user.

Comments by braduro


I will get it, as I'm an old subscriber to encoder audio. For sure, we'll chat, and gladly join the conversation. I was hoping my questions would get to the real story and add to the description of the device, such that folks could understand in what dimensions this will enhance their music.

Like the morph, akninganng, sounds it really lends itself to modulators. And it sounds like it likes parts, create space in a mix, and it offers another dimension of movement, as any filter might, which is why I'm trying to understand the allure of this filter specifically...

What makes it your favorite?
And seeing as you have been developing filters for quite some time, why was this not one of the first? Why would I pick this over your other selections?
How would you use it? Is it a performance enhancement? A creative, evolving sound? A x-fading, transition tool?

I had the E-MU 4xT

For the record, those buttons remain entirely multifunctional, even in device mode, and are typically dedicated for further navigating. Therefore the programming involved to put the buttons to use on the same bank pages as the knobs involves a much deeper understanding of Push and M4L. But anyone can include the banks object, refreeze and save the device, and test how it works on the push, easy peasy

Gabor, Hi
General m4l question: instead of the live.banks object, any idea how I could use the macro buttons instead of the encoders to correspond with buttons on a m4l device? That is, instead of using a macro knob on Push to toggle the state of a button to actually use a button to work as a button?
I'm chasing my tail on this research...

On the subject of controller assignments, any idea how I could use the macro buttons instead of the encoders to correspond with buttons on a m4l device? That is, instead of using a macro knob on Push to toggle the state of a button, to actually use a button to work as a button!

Looks like it's a matter of including the live.banks object. Doesn't even require any patching. Open the object, and then create as many banks as required.

It would be a far more tight implementation if the Macro Buttons below the encoders could be assigned in this manner, and so I will continue to research this...

Thanks for the swift reply, I completely understand. The best option is for me to peel up my rudimentary understanding of m4l and to open the patch. With the push, the user mode for MIDI mapping is fairly precious real estate. I'd rather keep it intact and with it's original assignments for when Stray completes CLYPHX for 11 or for other devices that takeover this mode. And assigning macros, as you know, only goes up to 16 parameters. That leaves a number of controls on pythagoras out of the game.

Could probably cover the full gambit in three banks or 2 if the toggle switches could be assigned to the macro buttons...

This is a wonder wheel. Thank you.
Any chance you could map parameters with banks to a Push?
I guess I could do that on my end, but for now I've assigned 16 macros that are easy to play with and randomize.

Hi John,
Making it through the walkthrough, thank you for doing that. And Love Stokes. Have a hard copy of the manual, even. (should I print out my own copy now that it's at 2.3? Or do you have more user cases for it since that release?)

If I was going to spend a chunk of change on a modulator, how would this differentiate itself from Suzuki Kentaro's devices? How would you leverage your dispatch using a modulator of his as an source? How does the visual ideation compare to some of his LFO's?

What kind of CPU jump would you experience bringing this device in? (Had hoped to see it switched off at some point during the walkthrough). How many patches and assignments does it take to arrive at an economy of scale, in terms of CPU, such that any less routings and you'd get better performance ala carte with LFO's or LineFO's?

Does it have a Push 2 interface, or are there other ways in which it justifies it's pop-up window real estate? I'm on a laptop (and don't do multi-screen).

Cheers to you

Would there be an easy way to assign the CC#'s listed in the setting menu for velocity and such? Would that be helpful? I've been having a mental block on the choices I could make with the best foresight...

Cheers to you for this

you know I love you, right?
Your color swapping previews are very close to inducing a seizure, any time I get on here. I do actually get seizures.

That said, if your animated preview images actually previewed a hint of the device's functionality, then I'd understand and appreciate why you are making the effort. A flowing before and after wave form. A bunch of moving dials. But for a skin change? It's really not a selling point, do you think? Honestly, I think your devices are pretty self explanatory, which is a good thing. I understand them entirely without this additional attention grabbing.

I hear you Oktagon,
I'm circling back to it. It really is a beauty. I really like the variation section, and appreciate that it remains intact while I load in other patches.
And I hear you on the pattern matrix on µtonic. It's constrained, and, also, the name of the game in live is get things into clip form.

My saving grace is that I've found some very satisfying sounds for my style and taste without using a lot of time previewing lots of 1-off percussion hits. Those patterns are the best way to preview how they meld.

Now that I really think about it, I don't have that many patches to sift through in order to use your preset system. If it was capable of 128 slots, I wouldn't have to choose, literally everything I have to individuate my pads would fit in your Rack. But with 32, I could still pick my favorites, and put my runner ups in additional Drum Rack pads.

That said, I'd still be missing some of the scripts, but there's ways to randomize and vary settings from within Live and M4L.

I will say however that having the parameters audio mapped and laid out in Push as you do, Oktagon, is already an incredibly valuable and clinch move. Thank you for making this!

effectively each instrument is saving a number of presets of patches, correct?
What if you wanted to keep the association to the original full kit (set of patches) along with the corresponding patterns from microtonic? What would be your workflow?
You could have Just the Tonic loaded up on it's own track in its drum rack, then beside it you could have another instance of microtonic, where you could drag the midi pattern into the first track. But then we don't have any connection with Push 2.

Any way to populate the patches/pads of Just the Tonic by copy/paste or dragging pads from Microtonic onto a drop zone of Just the Tonic?

The thing that offers External Instruments referencing a multi-drum instance of Microtonic is that I can still fire off or drag that built-in pattern, and I'll know that the patches belong to that same file.

The microtonic in itself isn't a synth engine I can't live without. It's the complete experience, all lean and independent of samples, tapping into a library of outside beats that makes it such an easy tool to grab.

I don't see how tapping into 100s of patches to customize every pad with microtonic outweighs the immediacy of using all the bundled decisions in a pattern file, see what I mean? I might as well choose patches and drum kits from an array of other libraries at that point, or make the equivalent drum synth in Operator. So what would bring the full microtonic kit experience into Push?

I've done you a disservice by voicing a critique on here, without asking you these questions directly or having the ability to delete prior comments. So I'm going to leave a review, all of which folks can confirm or challenge with their own impressions when reading the manual, running the demo, or viewing future video tutorials...

This is a very thorough tool, and it would be terrific for creating new settings, new scenery for longer, complex, multi-clip work. It's equally good at creating variation for basic elements. Some of the more subtle adjustments, like rotating a note, or an emphasis in velocity or length or position of existing notes, has profound implications for syncopation, modal music, as well as changing switching entire dance styles.

A scalable view, leads me to wonder why this couldn't just be inline in device view? Well the answer is that you only need one instance, so you can select anything visible on the grid or the clip, and apply it to that. The icons are still clear to me at the minimal scale, which is great for working with the palate.

The device gets passed the limits of the 8-clip view, because you could select however many clips, or even apply it globally across a selection, a session, track or scene.

There is a preference for auto applying to a clip, however, you will need to deliberate whether you are using your own abilities to selecting notes.

The device isn't a filter or criteria for note selection. In some places this would be irrelevant, because the routines are working with pitch classes, for example, and are rather clever in how notes travel with each other. The other feature is the blocks selection, which I didn't play with, but seemingly allows motifs to be the smallest building block. Be sure to include your deactivated notes, which are the only way to place save the length or timing of a block to include the rests, or silence.

Even when some the process is snappy, you may find that the undo process causes a lag. A built in memory to the clip may be helpful, or just make lots of copies of the original before working on a single clip.

the demo itself does not come with presets in the alphabetical place savers for the actions. Some examples might be helpful.

Some features did require further reference to the manual and were not self evident. The manual itself could use some diagrams. In some actions, a few, such as the distinction between having the Brain engaged or otherwise, or the connotation of the positions changing incrementally to each pitch class, like octave shifting up and down. You might wonder where some notes went, which feels like an unintentional bug but is really just something that could use some constraint, like when you send a note sailing into the 8th octave or -2 octave or create a velocity that is out of an audible range, you might wonder where your notes flew off to, and just start over on a new clip rather than try to trace your steps. That's where saving routines will come in handy for the full version.

I put the 1st movement of Beethoven's 5th Symphony through the paces, because he was able to build so much with those 2 notes and that basic motif, and it is so immediately familiar in my memory how the transmutations line up with what I'm looking at.

Examples of things that will require some reading up on are the aforementioned blocks, the exponential isometric curve, under exp/chop as well as clip-level stretch/comp.

Other actions are immediate self evident and satisfying, like randomizing mute notes, which has so much immediate potential for creating natural playing to a repeated rhythm, bass line, or sequence. And Clip slicing, which has been available in other tools for audio slicing with built-in slice feature. But this works like Clyphx slice feature by shifting loop positions, and now you can have some fun on the MIDI side.

I don't know if it's logical, but having the global button on made me wish for more actions that could utilize this level functionality.

Any plans for midi or key assignments? or tab and cursor navigation?

Looking forward to the full set of scales in the full version. I truly appreciate anyone who takes this idea beyond the constrained, "Push" subset.

of course the one time I didn't copy/paste my last comment, and the page timed-out. Let's try again:

Hi Ray!
Tremendous work.

My concern is that some of these functions can be accomplished through scripting, and furthermore, Ableton must be well aware of the potential of the LOM. Is Max the real way to go? And do you think more of these features will eventually be integrated natively into clip view?

I purchased the Multiclip Editor and Midi Modulators from Isotonik Studios just before the release of Live 10, and sure enough Ableton featured a multi-clip view. Albeit, I think Live's implementation is non-functional. Nonetheless, how would you distinguish Trans4ma from the aforementioned devices, or the free
Selection Filter posted on this site? How would you compare your device in expediency and agility compared to a judicious use of the standard editing tools and shortcuts?

I approach Live from a performance perspective, and I like my decisions to be kinesthetic and musical. I'm often catching spur of the moment curiosities and improvisations. I just wish there was a way of staying away from the mouse/point-click tediousness of editing

I'm all for tools that make the horizontal stage of music making more snappy and inspiring.
In other words, constructing contrasting material, building out an arrangement and the like. Pattern and repetition is Live's forte, so working within the clip--the base currency of Live, despite all the things one can do with M4L, for example--is the way to go.

I haven't even read the description and I already like what I see enough to blindly add XO and figure out what you are talking about!

might also be neat to have a white paper or a target list for different distribution platforms, media and pre-mastering, compression codecs, compensating for down-sampling when reading a true peak limiter and the like.
In other words, why would I set a target? Perhaps you could approach it from an ideal Master Fader target level and take it from there? With a template session.
Do you have a limiter in your master channel?
Do you set your default faders to anything other than unity (I personally do not, because I find it less constructive that ableton maintains 0 as the Reset value)
Do you have a target peak on your master?
Do you pull down on various tracks using volume buddy or varying utility devices? Where do you gain stage? Do you then do all your mixing exclusively from the fader? What's your resulting default for the Utility device? If your summing isn't a problem but you want the outcome into the master to also not be a problem, where is your happy place for gain compensating on various types of instrument tracks?
Do you factor in these targets for mixing out of the box and through an analog board? How would that configuration impact your decisions (would you aim for -18dbvu?)

Volume Buddy has a hold feature. Wouldn't it be neat if that change from nominal could be transferred to the nearest utility (to the left or right). That way you could truly use it like a tool rather than accrue multiple instances of the device.

I make a big decision between sets that I am recording in real time and would feel comfortable conducting in front of an audience, and cases when I'm bringing in tools that are meant for the studio alone. If I have multiple cases of this device, then it may become more than a tool and more like a crutch.

Might be nice to have another video where you go through the best places to apply it. Sub groups, inline on a track by track basis? Do you freeze flatten a lot (or one and not the other?) Which processing do you find it more essential than with others if you had to do a rough mix?

Hi Fabrizio,
I love all the things you make. How does this compare to the buffer shuffler, and some of the more stable mods based on it? How does it compare in terms of features, leanness, and performance? Do you have to drag/drop files into the device, or is it processing audio inline through the signal flow of the track?

Cheers to you

Is the idea here that you can do your mapping while you are away from your controller, and then assign the channel cc numbers that correspond to your controller and have it all work out when you get back?

1) Is there a bundled price? You know, for folks who want the factor synth, but have applications when a more lean device is the right tool? Or are both properly sandboxed, with sections or steps that can be deactivated, with easily closable panels?
2) the cross-synth, is there a morph dial or a cross fader between the master and the cued up syn section? That's kind of a greenie question, but I'm just wondering if a concept of two turntable decks could be analogous within the device itself, or am I routing instances of this to tracks, or multi routing one device?
3) is this a mouse and click affair? Or can I see much of the playability of this on a midi controller?

I've long been confused by both KryptIk, and now this. Why couldn't someone take an LFO, map it to a parameter, start session or clip automation record, and end up with a parameter that has an automation curve? Does that not work?

Please take me through as if I understand nothing. What user case scenario are you solving? Lead me up to it. Because I really don't get why I could use this. "You know when..." "Ever wonder why you can't..." "Isn't a drag having to..." "
Are we making a distinction between modulation and automation? Is there something more flexible doing things this way? What is it?

I used to have a lattice of dummy clips that I would keep automation shapes on, and then trigger them. Is this kinda like an automation shape generator? What if you could just change the parameters of the device and then just copy the shape over?

See, that's literally how clueless I am. I have underlying assumtions that are just getting in the way.

I'm embarrassed to admit this, but after all these years I still can't figure out how to get a m4l device to associate to its bundled presets when installing into the finder. Whenever I put a folder into my user library with the device and the presets alike, I get "Could not access the Max device file ["Arp Control.amxd"]"

Could you help me solve this mystery once and for all?

Hi Voodoohop!
Youve made mention of the file size since your first release. It never bothered me but for the question as to what is causing the size. Are there a lot of libraries, graphic files, or code to clean up?

any way for an equivalent button as the Copy session tempo, but with the segment bpm of the selected clip?

Ha!, well among other reasons, that's why LineFO is among the most popular devices on this platform.
1% is nonetheless exceptional performance.
I would imagine this to move a bit once there's playback through that track, what with the oscilloscope included.

Definitely big selling point!

Hey Technoir, how's the cpu hit on one instance of the chain shaper? On your machine, how many copies would it take for it to raise the processing bar by say, 1%?

Saintocean, M4L
This is dirty pool. There is a basic precept of economics dictated by willingness to pay. If people don't want to pay for something, they don't have to. If a developer doesn't want to give an original design away for free, they don't have to.

Now what you've done here is mod something without offering proper attribution, but rather glaze over your misgivings with a tongue n cheek flirtation. It's not even ELPHNT's role to defend himself here. It's the community's responsibility to defend him, and it's our collective responsibility to call out your antics.

Honestly, if it were up to me, I'd take your note pad down, based on ethical practices and the terms of the CC. I've got no stakes in this race. I save a plain text file in my project folder. Done. So the fact that you thought it worth throwing it in the developer's face tells the general public here that you thought the original did have value.

Definitely. Routing certainly came to mind. One of the 1st genuine tricks in Live was a track routing technique that I transferred clyphx actions. Effectively the trick allows you to use the x-fader deck assignments to transfer a clip into an effected signal and to use separate processing to return it to the original deck side. So you could smooth over the seams of an effect with delays as it came back to the dry signal, for example.
Another involves rerouting a second copy of the same playing clip to a modular synth that takes EXT as an oscillator. All kinds of routing that would otherwise require reaching for the mouse...

Could you provide a user case? We talking updated variables of the same action list? Is this effectively a pseq with 2 action lists in {} brackets?
Is the idea to do a bigger change of state to a session (changing routing, etc) and then change it back?

I love how people who use clyphx all seem to think differently and come up with different directions to go with it!

What have been your goto macros? I'm waiting for some smack my forehead moments...
(I use a lot of RND macrobats for example. So I'll probably make a macro that deletes these racks all at once from a session such that when I save the session for the first time and open it on a later date, I won't send all my effected devices into different directions.)

looks very tasty. Any chance of constructing a single lane version of it? I have SingleDrummer, and I find that this is lighter for occasions when I can make chains in a group and only need a 4-pad kit, or when I just want one lane of syncopations etc.

Or are there other things that you could do to release it as lean as possible?

Such an odd behavior I'm getting from the receiver. When I turn it on, it sounds EXACTLY as the pedal effect that I had on to the right of it, EVEN when the pedal device is turned OFF. In other words, it sounds like a volume jump (and not that it is maintaining the same RMS) when the CR is turned on, although the values on readout is that it is dynamically attenuating the signal AND even when the device between the CS and CR is turned off, it still sounds like the effect of the device to the right of the CR is turned on (when it isn't) when the CR is turned on...

Hi Spiralune,
First, I will be more patient in understanding the instructions here, as they are very thorough. But the sentence structure and phrasing is rather fragmented, as technical float-over info text tends to be, and I cannot from your initial statement understand what this device is accomplishing.

If you have 4 chains, couldn't you either assign the chain to a note range on a midi channel? then tap a corresponding pad? Or couldn't you in the example of 4 chains just distribute them evenly across the full range and use 4 positions on one dial? Why do I need to use this device? What user case scenario does this device solve? When does it become immediately obvious that this device is the way to address a problem?

Hi @encoderaudio
If the binary combinations are then summed in the number box to the left of the grid, could the grid then be populated based on the value of the number in the number box?

I ask this because
a) I don't like clicking on things in a GUI in a performance setting. A number field is something I can assign to a control
2) There are not enough preset slots to account for every combination of sequences over 5 lines. Even if there were a way to swap the note output between the lanes, there still wouldn't be enough preset slots to represent every combination

Now if a utility were at the end of that chain, I could use the difference between the the CS and the CR to adjust the gain and then take out the instances of the volume compensators, right?
So wouldn't it be possible to construct the CR such that it's intended purpose is to be inserted before a utility and to then takeover the gain dial of the utility from it's current position?

It might be nice to carry these tools into a studio session, or a live situation if they prove to be solid, and then not feel inclined to leave them in place. I say any chance to take a m4l device out of the equation in a performance critical situation is probably the right move....

april fools is 3 months out!

because the official packs on ableton do not announce an update schedule, nor does the manual on your site describe the changes in 2.0, would you consider adding update features/bugs/compatibility/optimization within the description area of your listing here?

Hiya FGC,
A pulse length of 16n with 16 pulses, 4 onsets, at the 0 phase should produce 4-on-the-floor right? And yet to my ears, despite it being evenly distributed in a 4/4 session, it sounds as if it is longer by a single 16th note. Playing with the metronome confirms this.

While we're at it, could you help me understand the optimal button? And how many combinations can it generate? Would it be possible for these to be selected randomly or have a dial rotate through them? Just trying to find a way for everything on the interface to be control assignable rather than a mouse selection...


This is a profoundly nuanced, wonderful device. Thank you!

I literally spent about 20 minutes exploring it with just with a single, repeated 1/8th note going into the device, and could have just left it at that. It's nice to know that even replanting a seed in Synplant can bore such musical results without even adding to the strain of the playback engine.

interesting. Seems to me, I'd want just one instance of this device. Either I delete all the ones before the External Instrument router and leave it at that, or drag the one instance before the drum rack entirely. Then I can just control which pad is in focus on the microtonic with the drum pads on the Push. The settings will then apply to whichever pad is highlighted in microtonic. Sure this tosses out the preset slots used the device, unless I use one column for a specific pad, for example. And there might be some nuisance in maintaining the blue hand on MicroTonicMaxed in device view while tapping different pads. But worth pursuing...

Always happy when someone throws some love towards µtonic.
Now customarily, I can control it with CC's or configure the plugin in native control, then have it map to Push or any User Settings for encoders. As for randomization, I can use µtonic's own Piku scripts, and as for save, I can just save the preset or bank for the device.
So what advantages are there in using a M4L device? For one, I wish there was a way of selecting a Pad other that clicking it so it was immediately ready on a per channel basis. But I do like that I don't have to map a repeat of every per-channel parameter.

Also, the values jump in any case when switching pads, but that's no biggie. So how do you work whereby you concluded that the M4L approach was the way to go?

that is to say, I have the triode...

Ah, so this is for the Anode?
Currently I use MotherGarage's Multimapper for this purpose, although I love your toggle switches for randomizing. Means I can still gain access to the all the toggle buttons via 8 macros.

I was trying to correspond some CC values with the parameters that you have here. There were numbers that you have that I don't have, and vs vs. And it may just be how we've labeled them, features that separate the two micros, different mappings etc: filter accent CC56, LFO retriever CC57 as examples...

From the limitations of other macro action devices and applications, it might be interesting if the move can be made relative to the last click or to it's current position, rather than an absolute place on the screen.
That way, items on a contextual menu could be automated. For example, when warping tracks, in clip view:
1) Selecting the transient with right click
2) Place 1.1.1 Here
3) Warp From here
Could all be done from a single action. The menu itself is a measurable-sized window, provided the Zoom Display value doesn't change. It's just that the absolute location of the pop-up, the selected transient, nor can the clip wave view itself be predetermined. But once the contextual menu is up, it's the same movement each time to select the items. Those Mouse clicks would be helpful to have in one action.

You can imagine how I'm tuning out today: yes, this is a ver generous device. I almost always get on here for feedback and questions, but really this is a pleasure straight out of the box, exclusively for studio production.
Muting 1 channel along with the Stereo/Crossover onto a single macro offers that conversion to ping-pong delay, as you suggested in the instructions. Easy Peasy

Like the STOP function. I wonder if a separate device with a simple passthrough along with clip recording function could be made to record via Resampling on a per track basis while retaining effect tails. Maybe it could function with the Clip slot stop button rather than the transport, such that resampling with tails could be accomplished without stopping the transport? Hmmmm

Hi Skinnerbox, hopefully you'll get a notice of a new comment here, but maybe anyone in-the-know could answer this. Seeing as this device was released just months before the new Simpler, what would you say are the settings within the Simpler to create the exact functionality of Salami? And if scrubbing the sample in classic mode using this device is still a distinctly different sounding result, let me know!
Cheers to you

Got it working now-your guess is as good as mine. Maybe a restart to assure MAX had updated or that the Live Browser properly indexed the new version. Maybe in numbering it the same as the previous version, I trashed the wrong copy of it while it was being referenced. Who's to say?

Getting a "Caution" (prohibited) sign when I try to drag this into a MIDI track. I'm running Live 9.6.1 with Max 7.2.4
(Holding out for 9.7 before I update again)

Confirmed that the previous version of LineFO 1.6 still drags in from the OS and Ableton Browser as expected.
Is anyone having the same issue?

M4L-in 18 months, you could have learned how to patch. I'd strongly encourage you to replace your conspiratorial and skeptical impulses with an open curiosity for the world you are observing. I know it might seem like your angle on things is more objective, and that it scrutinizes the truth behind the truth. But that's really not a thorough outlook on life, and I'm certain a general curiosity will allow to arrive at far more engaging questions and afford you even a more complete representation of your reality.

In these past 18 months,
have you used public transportation?
ordered from a counter or had fast food?
changed a lightbulb?
read a comic or magazine?
had to replace an inner tube on your bike?
bought some cables or adapters for your studio?
bought a beer for a friend?
fed a pet?
thrown out and replaced a pair of socks?
mailed a package?
given to a street musician or dancer?
bought an EP off a streaming music service or downloaded a movie or pay-per-view?
grabbed a game off an app store or steam?
flipped the lights on? Lit a log, or turned the heat on?

The only take-home observation I have of bennniii that is worth sticking with is that he's an upstanding guy. He's offered an exceptional amount of care for you and me, in support for his devices, in the value of the device itself-which can only be measured in your music- and in patience for the quality assurance we can provide for him. There's really no incentive in it for either of us to test the limits of his patience. And I assure you, you have a limit as well, which I'm hoping you'll take as a reminder to approach things with a little more humility. I promise, it won't hurt you to do so.

So benniii, when you figure out the updates for v1 or want to release v2, make sure you consider fairly what you need to change a light bulb, grab a refreshment for someone you care about, feed a cat, whatever it may be that matter to you and are obligated to, and charge accordingly. Put it among the k-devices offerings if you need. First off, that would be a headline story on ableton, and well worth covering. Second, you can always offer a promo code to those in need, if you feel like it is regressive to charge for Polyrhythmus.

So each pad gets 99 of it's own patterns-or saved sequences- in the pro version, is that right? So that's 5.7×10^30 combinations or overall patterns?

Would 3 instances of this in separate chains amount to less cpu than the full-fledged 8 lanes for the Pro version? What are the other differences between the pro and the single? Might be nice to include columns for the other two devices on that chart on the product page...

How would you compare the CPU impact with other midi devices? I imagine its minuscule, but if you dragged/copied multiple instances with the transport stopped, what would it take for you to see your CPU go up 1%, for example?

Are all the parameters that should be visible instant mapped in a logical order on the Push?

While we're on the topic, I didn't see a Check Out button on your site. Registered thinking that licenses would show up when I was signed in, but didn't even get that far!

Cheers to you

Hey Jon, great to hear back from you
I don't think your question is rhetorical-there's definitely an answer I can offer.

"even if I had everything perfectly mapped out for all controllers or what have you, don't you think it would still occupy to much attention?"
By "attention" in this context I really mean "too much reaching for the mouse". I"m perfectly fine with centering my performance on developing a sequence or rhythm through commonplace-it's definitely that powerful and worthy of attention.

But the max object identifiers are sequentially all over the place. So it's not so much that anyone needs to prefer one controller over the other in order to fall in step, it's that standard Instant Mapping on any device will be scrambled.

As for simplicity-I definitely like economy, although I wouldn't trade Commonplace's complexity for any other options out there. I get around assigning too many controls to something by making ranges of variables randomizable (and reset).

I'm using Genbeat 1.2 by Kasper Skov for a similar niche. It serves in on-the-spot decisions, i.e. performance settings, in part because I can actually map everything to macros and nest in a rack. There's always a bit of a trade off in dialing in my note clusters-should I hardwire it to an impulse, drum rack, or try it tonally? Hyakken accommodates this issue beautifully in his Note Assign pop-up window [note mapping] for the Trigger8 v1.02. I might point out that exposing Midi note numbers as randomizable produces very unpredictable, if not unusable results in most cases. So random, or an LFO, or an envelope follower doesn't come in handy for everything.

That's another beautiful outcome of Hyakken's solution for note assign: it's safely stowed away and unaffected by remote scripts or other things open to the ableton interface. Take your device as a comparison, and if I was to randomize all visible parameters at once on Commonplace, I'd end up scrambling all my carefully chosen note values.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but with commonplace,
a) Autotriggers A/B are not midi mappable. That would make for a fun performance element.
b) none of the min/max fields nor any of the drop down menus are midi mappable. These would make for useful decisions, randomized or variating values.
That includes:
i) The min/max steps as well as
ii) random velocity range
iii) Trigger Rate drop down menu, including the manual option
iv) The step rate
v) the note length
vi) the step length

Again, for simplicity, I like to constrain the range of variables and then open up more parameters to randomization. One button. Boom. So more parameters could be well-served by making them assignable but also exposing their range in macro assigning and/or manual midi mapping. You could also consider having your built in Random and Clear buttons control more of these parameters, or having other pairs of R and C buttons for other areas of the interface. And I do appreciate that the R/C buttons can already be assigned.

So while still respecting people's different definitions of performance and their choices, there's still plenty that can be opened up to them. By the way, what you might find among the easier or more mundane decisions in using M4L for interface design are still technical matters above the likes of me! I'm just starting to open the hood, split devices up and customize. So these little decisions don't fall on deaf ears.

Cheers to you, Jon

Hey Hyakken, just posted this on the M5816 page as well; covering my bases:

always happy to see an update in my email

Is the 1.5beta stable at this point? What are the trade-offs and stability between the two clocks to warrant such a leap? Should I be using 1.5?

Also, I noticed the bundle comes with two copies of 1.02, one labeled midi. Is the only difference that the LFO's are pre-selected to control midi on one copy? In other words, are they effectively the same device?

Cheers to you

Hey Hyakken, always happy to see an update in my email

Is the 1.5beta stable at this point? What are the trade-offs and stability between the two clocks to warrant such a leap? Should I be using 1.5?

Also, I noticed the bundle comes with two copies of 1.02, one labeled midi. Is the only difference that the LFO's are pre-selected to control midi on one copy? In other words, are they effectively the same device?

Cheers to you

Filled out the survey, so I was hoping to add more observations here with your revisions:

So the rec tab has a field per step for capacity, "No."? And "Bejehdjfjeb"?-I'm watching on a smart phone and away from my studio. What is the reason for the third field? The number field advances with each entry, and we already know the capacity. We also know when the step flushes itself if it was already full. What I don't see is a number that indicates/labels which of the choices are currently being played on that step, and not sure if for performance of the device that I'd want it. I see the note and velocity read out on the bottom, but I don't see those change with each pass or step either, so note sure what they are there for.

Also, my note previously is a bit more clear if you consider a different user case: what if the track it's on is monitoring the clip or other sequencers, not note input? Then you might want a button to turn the note intake off so you can continue playing the what you've already captured and don't loose the buffers which might otherwise empty on another pass. Furthermore, you might consider a Thru option, so further notes are played passed your device but don't impact the memory of it.

Finally, "Clear" per step and "New" as a global control could be resolved-either word is suitable to describe both, I think. Without it I might think clear is just clearing the notes, not resetting the parameters of that step.

Cheers to you for building this! I wish I could take to learning m4l as readily as you did.

Just dipping my toes after having purchased a license:
With IP Remote, and way to extend support to LividInstruments Base and Base II? I purchased one to explore as a keyboard, but the action doesn't lend itself to pad playing. Matrix might be repurposed for a preset trigger...

Any interest in creating randomizer devices?
This project has long been abandoned, but I loved how you could exclude parameters and create ranges. Might be a fun addition to your suite of devices.

"comments area" I meant "Description", the write up area for the device itself

Thanks! The Comments Area is a great place to document your changes. And of course you can always increment your version numbers rather than rename it "Updated".

What I see is:
*the Mangle button is gone, but changing a selection in the option menu, or even choosing the same item again, will Randomize the values.
* New labels for "New" which I assume flushes the Note buffer. "Go!" Literally turns the sequencer on/off. But if I'm not mistaken, even viewing the Rec tab still saves new note variables, so I don't understand what is actually the button for "Okay, don't take in any more notes, just play the sequence with the round-robin notes you already have"
*Uncertain of where the third option for sequence is: if Drunk and Random are a toggle, then how do I default back to the sequencer just going in order? Or are the Random/Drunk options just for the order of notes saved in each step's capacity?

Yeah, didn't want to spoil the fun :) I did get as far as watching the video and cutting in a bit of silence, until I said "what the"...

I appreciate the joke in the false modesty of this sequencer-it's anything but commonplace.

My only complaint is that the levels of complexity are only available from clicking/mousing on the GUI. So this device definitely belongs in the studio for me, and would occupy too much of my attention on the stage.

The Text and Number order of the variables is not clear, so Push won't grab onto things in a logical fashion. Not all toggles/buttons nor beat division drop down menus are macro assignable. And somethings that I'd want to lock out from random changes, like the note values, are too readily changeable. Might be nice if other sections of the device were included in the random switch. And there's no interpolation between the presets-but that'd be icing.

What's left is something that is still more expansive and ambitious than my imagination has yet to even wrangle. There's just so much you can do with this thing. It could add exceptional complexity or nuance to a drum beat, but it could also offer a delineated B-section alternative or a fill. Euclidean rhythms would be equally welcome here. The pace of changes and probabilities alone are a world of exploration. Patterns could evolve with turn of the knob, or you could introduce radical, abrupt change.

And that just comes to mind if you're using this for a percussion pattern. With 2 pitches per lane, this is equally welcome for building bass variation or synth sequences. Velocity has just as complete coverage.

And it's lean and stable thus far.

Thanks for getting back to me. Yeah, Clyphx has specific nomenclature for the scope of automation you want saved, and for the specific tracks/devices you want included. It accomplishes this both through the action names and the accepted modifiers.
Might be worth looking into creating a max shell for certain actions to be saved to the device itself. Or alternatively seeing if the delineators in a saved snap clip could be understood from within the text file in SuperConductor...

Is there a way to incorporate a snapshot feature into this device so that the user does not need to manually enter all the parameter values into superconductor, but rather press a button and have the current state of mixer/device/play settings all recorded at once? It can be done with a Clyphx Snap Clip, but was looking for a way to manage presets more elegantly than with a non-playing track...

I love this stuff. It's a little humor, a genuine window into the future, and a little off-schedule for your medication. Didn't you have an assistant helping you with the natural language description?

So this thing bricks your ableton session and makes a beep. Funny thing is, for those of us who listened to the chirps of gravitational waves, I no longer expect much more understanding from first contact. Really stirs the imagination!

a) Can this save mixer settings?
b) Can you constrain which settings you don't want saved (no sends, for example. Or no new preceding devices)
c) Can you save mixer settings across multiple tracks. For example ALL fader positions?

And +1 for morphing between two preset positions! That would be fun...

This was what I needed help with after an additional read through:

By full confession, how does CC assignment work exactly? Does the track need to be available to all or the specific port/channel in order to see the CC value that you’re spinning? Moving a knob is not updating the CC number in the box, although I can punch the value in myself. I have a number of VSTi’s with this feature, but I so rarely look into using it. Does the preference have more to do with how you program your controllers or how you upload future instances of the device? I usually hotwap instruments in place, so I don’t loose my manual assignments.

also, the midi map mode has no apparently obvious engagement. “M” makes it visible to manual mapping in live. Great. I pick a controller which is easily assigned to GUI objects in live, and I do see that the value scale now glows in Control Bank, but that same encoder will not assign itself to the value bar in Control Bank. Is the listener on the interface somewhere else?

“MIDI-mapping is by default disabled in order not to record useless automation in clips.” I didn’t understand this explanation.

Throughput limiter. Should this be reflected in automation thinning? IE, will I see less automation points? Might be a good indication of the responsiveness.

Oh and if you do decide to add a video, a follow up with the router/receiver devices would really send it home.

Please forgive me, but I may have posted a similar comment in the 2.7 version. A certain level of abstraction is difficult for me to grasp conceptually. I've read the hints hovering over the text, and will re-read your summary a few times. Maybe a direct application within a video would finally knock me in the head?

How does this compare with NativeKontrol DDC? How does it know of which equivalent parameter on which track a control should takeover? Do I need an instance on every participating track? Okay, time to read into it again...

I'm like a kid in a candy shop. Thanks MG

Hey, any interest in making a tempo AND time signature version of this? I know there's one on the boards here, but of the little I know about patching, yours offers more elegant code, and I'm sticking with this.

Agreed. It opens to an empty max device quoting the directory location, :EOF, and the button to open a max window showing all the reseting and enumerating errors

Hey, Happy New Year!
I love that each step control has its own random/clear button. Are these random buttons visible to midi or keyboard assignment?

Exactly what I was looking for! I've been using the Isotonik Smart device, and when it comes to mapping to device chains, Utility, or Macros, it doesn't behave as smart as it needs to. When you save a return to a session, the ranges will be incorrect or frozen.

With youour device, you create however many instances that you need, no more no less, thus being much lighter on cpu than the Smart. And your device also works! Save a template and the ranges and values are respected for next time. Why recreate the wheel, right? Assigning the input value to a shared macro is a much nicer way to go.

And the curves really do help in a practical sense, not only for the feel of the control, but also to assure when you want to land and stick a default value.

Oh I see, the reset engaged will only randomize on that first launch, so even if you forget to delete it (which isn't a bad idea to lighten the load) your session will commit to that first tempo.

I'd put it in my Master track or whichever you first see when you open a template in order to delete it before venturing further...

Love this. So many times I open a new session, stumble down an interesting road, and then realize that yet again, after resampling and getting used to a groove, that I'm predictably in the default tempo. My work around has to save my template at different tempos say every month. Even this becomes arbitrary, as the distinctions kind of wash away, unless you exclusively work within one or two genres.
Definitely on board with this one.

I was sooo close to understanding this device out of the box! There are some things that I couldn't confirm just from the included description.

For one, I'd get Loop to work on some occasions, and others not. Could be with the type of control-toggle vs momentary- that I was assigning it to. But if loop was toggled with a simultaneous and separate message with the Midi-map'd momentary button, it most typically did not loop, even after waiting the allocated quantization time. Just to make sure I understand this, why does quantization get it's own bang? That's just to visually see when the movement on the parameter kicks in, right?

But in any case, sometimes I did get it to loop. Without looping, it waits until launch quantization, okay. Then it loops at the rate in the ramp value. Then came the next observation: I've found on occasions that I couldn't get the Loop to stop. Even after the Loop button was disengaged, and sometimes even after the Map was unassigned. Weird.

It might be fun if the quantize options also effected the loop, and went directly to the initial value, i.e. without the ramp. That way, if I understand this correctly, you'd already have a sawtooth shape built into the functionality of the loop. In fact, I was exploring the potential of this device as low-overhead and transient takeover LFO for 8 mappable items.

Still, could you volunteer some definitive examples where a momentary control would be better than a dedicated button, and that a ramp is preferred over i/o? Ie, when would you want a button to act as a continuous controller? And I'd love to see how your two devices are designed to work in conjunction. I just couldn't conceptualize it.

Finally, this is another limitation of my own use of Live and devices. What are the implications of the MIDI/CC learn button? Is this like directly assigning values on a VST rather than within ableton's manual midi control? It's just an approach I'm fairly green at so I wonder if anyone could inundate me with it and its merits. How then do the Learn and Map-Me assignments play with each other? Does one takeover for the other, permitting manual control while the other offers timed control? Is the idea that the Learn assignment be an encoder while the map-me remain a button?

So you can see, this was just a shave beyond my ability to incorporate as an intuitive device.

Oh man, now that I'm recounting it, there's well over a dozen stages that the point is either traveling along the x or y, not just 5 or 6. Couple that with changing the occurrences of kick/snare/HH along with the chaos knob, and there's a banquet of resulting rhythms...

Always a pleasure to see this very worthy device getting a new wave of attention.
I'm curious: what is the resolution of patterns on the x/y grid? I tried a more critical listen and it seems like both axis go through just a few boundaries where the rhythm changes; maybe 4 to 6 each. Is that correct? So there really is a fairly finite (16 to 36 or so) resulting rhythms that cover any quadrant of the grid. Would that be the story?

Finally, this one seems the most novel of the three, in part because I can't picture the musical consequence of using it! It sounds like the ultimate effect may not be unlike using the chord pattern feature on the arpeggiator. But you introduce different rhythms by letting notes converge at different places, and different sonorities by letting it resolve to different notes.
As for the shortening of the notes, I'm picturing this could be nice for a build-up, or it could just introduce different styles to a pad section.

Just so there aren't 3 transactions on my card/paypal, do you have any plans of bundling them so I could name my price on the pack?

I'm going to individually comment here, because all of these MIDI manipulations are very thoughtful niche tools. In general, I could see how easy it would be to find the sweet spot with the settings and dedicated just a simple button to do some real magic in a live production. Couple that with just some cursors for moving around the session grid...

How does this one sound from one end of the spectrum to the other? Does the "wild" impact leaps? Chromatic embellishments? Erratic/"drunken" change in direction? Tame being, steps and passing notes, in key, correcting course with movement in the opposite direction after leaps? Is this an acid-inspired set of sequences?

I love how these 3 new devices of yours really keep players from mousing around for quick ideas. That's a bottom line in my book for reaching for something in a performance setting.
This one in particular sounds like it would be great quite literally for creating bridge or C material. Or just simply making the change of clips more smooth, seeing as ableton demands some work arounds for ties and partial measures, etc.

Good to hear from you SS4V,
And thanks for responding to my observations.
Before I sift through your reply, I don't think it would be overwhelming for a drop-down method to create an even more complete set of chords, assuming each interval had it's own set and you keep the open/closed voicing. But I am certainly happy with the amount of choices already available, and prefer to not click around an interface more than I have to.
Yes, the ties respond better to dragging than they do clicking on the mouse. Which leads me to a few more suggestions:
1) Perhaps a note on/off and tie randomize button would serve here?
(For one, along with the interval variations, I tend to not have any strong attachment to the rhythm until I'd tried patterns and listened to them. My feeling in general is that Live was originally intended for a performance setting, or at least real time mixing and editing. I categorize devices based on whether they are more suited for the studio or the stage. If I have to reach for the mouse on a device, it's relegated for the studio. A randomizer might make these decisions a bit more in-the-moment.)
2) My other suggestion is that perhaps the sequencer columns could also be greyed out and extended (or yellowed out or turned off) to correspond with note off steps and ties? After working out a specific chord, it might be nice to immediately see if that chord will be struck or if the last one will be held into it and therefore overlooked. It's a bit of an information disconnect to see the chord in place and not hear it. It reads as if it should be a slur into the second chord, which is not the case. And then you need to move the chord step or get rid of the tie in order to hear the progression again. Lots of A/Bing.
There are other sequencers which resize the sequencer steps depending on the divisions, like Time & Timbre or Genbeat16
3) Finally, maybe there could be a way with a copy button, to reorganize and move around chord rows. That way you could move all the chords that work next to each other and see how many lanes are left available. Or try the same harmonic rhythm but move different chords in position to try them? Maybe....

This is a very useful device. But there are some things I'm finding that make it a bit unruly:

The rhythm lanes are not intuitive for me, and I feel like the object listening areas are very finicky. Am I aiming with my cursor for those little yellow boxes that are mildly shaded? Or am I aiming for the lines? Because with "tie" listed in the middle, the labels feel misaligned. Are they darker for the downbeat steps or for slurring for for note off? Is the OFF for the turning off the tie, or for disengaging the note? How about just two lanes, Note and Tie?

As for finding the best sonorities, I don't feel like this update is really an advantage. I'd rather have a more complete/comprehensive list of options in the dropdown menus then to deduce which chord variations were not already represented.

Also, why do you need a separate COPY and SET button? Why else would you copy a chord form to that sequencer lane if no to set it?

It might also be nice to have a movable start/loop length bracket at the top of the grid. Why? Sometimes I just want to hear how 2 or 3 chords comp between each other. Because I find it tricky to keep everything else in place while I listen to one chord going into the other it would be fun to isolate the loop while working out the best progression.
As it stands now, I find myself creating very long sequences just to try out every variation of chord change. The alternative would be to create 2-step sequences and slow the interval down, but then you loose the place saver for the other chord steps that might already be composed.
Finally, and this is just a creative limitation of my own imagination-by the time I've worked out all the other choices mentioned above, I find it particularly difficult to decide on a syncopation and harmonic rhythm. Just a problem I have with ALL meter division categorical fields: 4n? 8t? By the time I check back with my metronome, I've lost most creative opinion or interest in figuring out what pace I want to work at.
Also, I wonder if having a step and slur sequencer is really a good habit to be forming in ableton live? Much better session management I think when you are willing to translate your decisions into a clip. My motto for ableton is "however generative or creative your decisions, the common currency of ableton is the clip." I'll have to check out your latest device to see how you reconcile this principle. But maybe this sequencer could have a drag-and-drop into a clip.

That's a lot to mention, I realize! Just so you know how much I value the creative merit of this device and your work, I have had a dedicated track with it saved into my main session template!
Thank you for your hard work!

Looks sounds beautiful. Does this replace scrubber 1.1? how do they operate differently? My eyes tend to glaze over trying to musically understand the different between slice, loop, chop yadda yadda....

Hi Dataf1ow, good to hear from you
Yeah, I wish I could point to those things, but my clip launch resolution, my buffer size and resulting latency are well below 10ms if not measured in samples. I do plenty of live performance moves that are timing and syncopation critical.

When it falls off it's responsiveness it really feels like the control is on the 1-bar level for some reason, or that the scrub location is dependent on the note-off location of a track with a note length device stuck on it. I just can't describe or isolate it, it's just too weird.

The only thing I can think of is that I've assembled some python adaptations that send clip launch with some velocity sensitivity on the PUSH for example, and allow velocity values on the drum rack step sequencer. But that's just a wild guess.

Fun! When I can get it to work as responsive as you show in the video...
I find that sometimes the playhead scrub moves only with the note-off message, or maybe its catching the next 16th note when quantization is on? Whatever it is, it felt a bit disconcerting. But in most cases I couldn't retrigger or move around the clip nearly as nimbly as you did. And sometimes it feels like I loose responsiveness to the clip altogether, maybe at a bar's launch resolution at best.
I wish I could articulate the grey area of my interaction with it a bit better for you; I just couldn't put my finger on what was loosing focus, what was loosing timing is pretty good.
Also, could you remind me of the key combination for picking up on the downbeat with the other tracks? I couldn't see this behavior difference acknowledge on the patches interface while using a Push.
Cheers for making this! I hope I experience enough stability with it that I can soon incorporate it into my performance template...

On second thought, I can see the advantages of keeping this an instrument rack, as Push will focus on it in note view.
But the option of not disengaging the resonator speakers with a note-off message might still be a good alternative for continuing signal through the resonator...

"does" should read "does not"

Oh and even just having your assistant publish the instruction manual as a separate download on your site-something one does need to purchase-would be an excellent start.

Why not offer Peter Kirn a copy over at createdigitalmusic? It would be helpful for prospective purchasers if you had more reviews or youtube demos.
And/Or make more tracks on soundcloud (preferably not as long nor with a 1-bar beat.) as solo instrument, in arrangement, etc.

For one, 40 euro is an armful if you don't know
*how it works
*how diverse the soundscape is: drones, pads, lead, multiple instances?
*impact on CPU -It looks expensive in this regard as well, no?
*if it comes with presets
*Is it entirely generative or are the knobs worth performing on? Do they lend themselves to modulation or are they more for dialing in settings?
*how regularly it is updated/ future features list

If the sound is meant to speak for itself, then I would suggest focusing of posting more sounds or maybe just a walk-through of each parameter. People will want to hear how smooth the knobs are, how rich the sound is.

I love your designs-they are profound and ambitious. But many folks won't buy unless they appreciate that the technology is genuinely innovative. Otherwise there's an equal risk that it's snake oil or the wizard behind the curtain, so to speak. So even if it ends up being more modest in its claims, people will like it if its honestly useful/beautiful.

just my 2 cents.
Cheers to you!

I think you're definitely on track with FFT window/size
Maybe multi band? And being able to turn off bands that are not being utilized. I'm thinking of this:
which as an audio unit didn't have an interface. Therefore it was unable to populate a device view in ableton and constrain the segments to the number of bands you wanted. You effectively turned on all 8 gates or none at all, which made it heavier on CPU.

I'm thoroughly enjoying this.

*0 sample impact on latency compensation and very stable
*had to pile on instances before I saw any CPU increase
*exceptionally wide range of creative possibilities and routings
*responsiveness. enough for melodic lines, not just harmonic structure.

I've found ways to accommodate the device in many routing scenarios however I do have some considerations:
Does this need to be an instrument device? Could it be midi? I've found myself creating parallel chains on instrument tracks in order to drop it in, whereas I already have no-output midi tracks setup for other utilities or midi-thru.

Also, the note off messages are turning the speakers off of the resonators, right? If this is on a return, for example, at 100% wet that would completely mute the signal. I like the result for playing it like an instrument.

Alternatively, I can see the use of keeping the resonator open, but just changing the sonorities. I've worked this by grouping the resonator and assigning the resonator speakers to a knob with a range of 127 min/ 127 max. Again, I can see the potential of having the speakers off with the note off message, so a sustain toggle (or alternatively a foot pedal momentary assignment?) might be nice.

No, I don't miss having the full MIDI note range, thank you for asking. In fact, I bet it keeps us out of trouble-no continuous rumbling or screeching. I think you'd end up engaging the cut-off filter out of necessity.

Thank you SO much for posting this!

Hi bastienhild,

I'm still getting buttons for "read from a text file" following this "template".
The last version to include an oblique deck for me was 1.3
Do I have the right of things? Should I be looking for my deck of choice at this point, or am I not saving the files from your download link correctly/completely?

I'm a paying supporter of the full bundle on gamma-devices and I might as well weigh in here.

Snaper was definitely outgrowing the site, practically in the same way you are on yours, Hyakken. That's not to say that as a customer of you both, it isn't entirely worthwhile sifting around and finding all the genuine gems that you both are offering. Only that a very comprehensive browsing and shopping experience was getting a bit tangential. Difficult to see how devices related to each other (is that a product announcement or an interface update?), how the postings related to each other (was that a month ago, or should I search for all "instruments"? "would google do a better job of indexing this site or should I use the search field?"), etc.

As for no longer adding to the "complete bundle", in short, I completely understand. Longer answer, I would strongly encourage any producers to use separate monikers for collaboration, side-projects, and new directions. On the outlier example, it's kind of like Prince changing his name to a symbol so he can still release music outside the contract of a label that he thought was constraining him. As for getting into an agreement with your label or your customers in the first place? Hindsight is 20/20. And often we pay the consequences of lesser decisions. But more accurately, even contracts are designed to be renegotiated, their nuances altered.

Gamma-Devices offers all updates and additions to the complete bundle for free. I don't see how he's letting us down on that promise. The complete bundle and it's updates are free. If anything, it's probably an offer that none of us should repeat, because the seed money might be great for supporting further development, but the long-term is limiting unless you're willing to completely outgrow your shell, so to speak.

As for offering it free to non-paying customers. Is that right? Even that seems like a very generous and perhaps fiscally reckless offer. Just appreciate that the object for anyone using these devices is to create value in making things that at some point outweigh the price tag of the devices themselves. I've had at least a year with these things as a paying customer. I'm not about to depreciate what that time has been worth, nor am I threatened nor offended that other people will get them for free. (I just don't want to obligate Snaper to this offer if I've misunderstood him.) So, ding ding, soup's on.

Well, this is the story of the month as I'm concerned.

Sorry-those questions were not sent in the order I intended, but you get the idea!

Hi Fab,

I have a question about the Leading measure feature. If I may paraphrase, this anticipates the chord of the next measure, right? Would it be possible instead to organize chord changes so as to define harmonic rhythm? This concept is different from building off the next chord of the measure, which tends to take away tension and anticipation and is generally not considered good voice leading.

Finally, what CPU impact did the two devices have in your example session? Are these intended to work only in the studio, or are they relatively light and low-risk of crashing?
Any PUSH takeover integration in the future? It seems like a great way to build clip-based composition. I really enjoy that I don't have to MIDI record to a separate track...
The baseline device is so complete, it seems to me that harmonic rhythm, i.e. the pulse to which chords change, their rate and their syncopation, would be an important element to create. Does progressive permit chord changes on partial measures in different places of the measure? How are the 2 designed to create this result if possible?

Also, will you be offering a bundled price for any of your devices?

Was this just updated on April 3rd? Will you be sending out an update link via email? Because I've already offered my name/email address when I first downloaded it.

Is the idea for the latest releases that I am to supply my own text file of choice? I noticed that only 1.3 still functions when I drop it into a track.
I enjoy it plenty-I look at it on my Templates master track, delete it, then I'm off to the races...