this doesnt sound normal
A pattern is always linked to a Kit, if you copy a pattern and do not associate a different Kit to it (immediately) then any edits to the Kit will be affecting the original Kit - the extent to which you can recover the situation depends on what status your kits/pattern/projects are in wrt save hierarchy rules and whether you are operating in the working temp version or the last stored version
that’s why it would help to test permutations of edits/saves/loads on a dummy project or two
you’re not providing enough detailed info to illustrate that you are cognisant of and accounting for the workflow constraints/nuances
to make iterations of a kit
have a kit
copy it
copy pattern
associate the copied kit to the copied pattern (i.e. load the kit into the pattern)
edit that unique kit
you will have two separate kits and less chance of confusing matters
1 Like
Kits are the best thing about Rytm. Loads of flexibility.
You can also use them to make a shared template for scene and perf settings too(use common parameters like delay send, etc to avoid weird behavior). Saves a lot of time setting up scenes and performances over and over again.
1 Like
i just had a quick try and things are fine on 1.7 afaict (without even considering the bigger saved/working projects issue)
no issues restoring a saved kit back having worked on a copy of it on a cloned pattern temporarily, likewise no issues just making a copy straight away and working on that in a new pattern
where you may have issues is if you create too many ‘iterations’ of too many kits, there’s a small swap space for working kits and there could be saving if you exceed this limit
this is why i suggest trying this out for your own workflow, this is not something which concerns my use case so i don’t sweat the details
but it isn’t obvious (yet) to me that there are such changes in 1.7
it’s a really easy test
just assign impulse machines to every track, save that in a kit, make a pattern, save both, save project, then experiment by changing a sound on one track away from impulse e.g. on a ‘new’ kit or iteration kit etc and see how it works when you do copies and edits and reloads etc
2 Likes
I am just noting there’s a difference from the old OS and I prefer the previous version’s kit saving. I was aware of the restraints and nuances of how it was and mades loads of tracks with the machine and used it very deeply. Just saying this new way keeps tripping me up. I wish they just explicitly wrote out how they changed the kit saving so I don’t have to guess.
1 Like
i believe he just made the point that nothing has changed
3 Likes
let’s assume they didn’t until you can list steps that shows it isn’t working as described/intended
if it was borked as you (vaguely) describe, i shouldn’t have been able to restore an iterated kit back to the saved version - what minimum steps are required to replicate your assertion it has changed
3 Likes
On my RYTM, if I have edited Pattern 1 and Kit 1 then select Pattern 2, I’m still editing Kit 1. So if I’m in Pattern 2 and make changes and save, it will overwrite Kit 1. This affects both Pattern 1 and 2.
So generally, every time I select a new Pattern, I also select a new Kit. The only exception is if I’m building out a new part of a song to be used in song mode or pattern chaining, at which point I will want to choose a pre-existing kit.
1 Like
“where you may have issues is if you create too many ‘iterations’ of too many kits, there’s a small swap space for working kits and there could be saving if you exceed this limit”
This makes sense to me, I am doing loads of automation and the sometimes not renaming the duplicate kits. Could be a glitch because it’s inconsistent behavior. Tried it again last night and wasn’t able to replicate it with only minor tweaks. Swear it’s happened a couple times…
3 Likes
Pro tip: put the pattern number in the kit name.
8 Likes
hi everyone! i want to run my nord drum 2 through the AR MKII. The ND2 volume is relatively low compared to the AR. just to check:
- the signal routing is so that the ND2 goes directly to the analog compressor of the AR right?
- the latest update dit not implement/bring a mixer view like on the syntakt right?
- to get everything to sound nice together, what would you recommend? i can’t think of anything else than lowereing the volume of each separate AR track. which is a bit of a hassle.
yes
right
mixer, external signal boost with something (there are many threads discussing this), bring up the MUP of the compressor to boost everything and lowering down the internal track volumes
1 Like
thanks. Then its as I feared. my signal chain is ND2->AR2->OTO BOUM->MIXER now
might have to change it to ND2->OTO BOUM->AR2->MIXER. that way I can boost the ND2 a bit.
try adding comp MUP first, it will add some noise but up until 20-30 it’s ok, if you have signal running you’ll barely notice it, then mix in your internal track to the external source, it’s pretty decent solution
yes i tried this, with ratio as low as possible, just adding MUP. This compensates for the volume indeed, works nicely. However, it obviously also makes the AR2 tracks louder. So still, the ND2 is relatively lower in volume
yeah the internal tracks are loud, extra loudness comes from DISTortion as well if you use it, it only applies to internal tracks and it’s real juicy, so no way around lowering the internal tracks to around 30-50 amp levels from my experience with DN…
1 Like
For new OS 1.70: “random Slew option for LFOs’ RND waveform,”
Because it’s easy to overlook in the manual, and cause I don’t find it on a search here, I leave this breadcrumb for future 'nauts:
“If WAV is set to RND then the SPH parameter will instead add slew to the transitions in the waveform.”
What “slew” means is that the values from the LFO will more (or less) gently slide from value to value, like an ocean wave rather than a stairstep. Try this to hear it well: loooong noise hit, FILTER at middle value with a lowpass or bandpass filter, LFO set to modulate FILT FREQ, and set the LFO shape to RND and the speed to fairly slow. Now turn up the SPH parameter, you’ll hear the noise being filtered like a rolling wave, rather than snapping from value to value.
Neat!
4 Likes
Does anyone have an ETA on bug fixes? The page loop function interfering with fills is a real pain on the MKI
2 Likes
No, there’s never ETAs … with a significant issue like that I’d guess it is coming before periodic upgrades etc
1 Like
I can’t figure this one out, no matter what I try the resampling won’t happen unless threshold is exceeded, is it possible to start resampling from transport? or it has to be done with a short transient?