Thanks man, really appreciate it 
1 Like
I recently got the oxi one and love that I can have everything in the same key on my elektron machines without having to adjust everything manually every time I start a new pattern. I’ve been using the random sequence to generate a base sequence to start with and adjust what I need to so it fits what’s in my head. It gives me a good jumping off point and has really helped with getting things going faster because I may not have gotten to where the random sequence started me at.
3 Likes
I love the idea of generative music, but since I can play piano, I’ve found its so much easier to just improvise something. Its faster, more satisfyingly musical and usable. My experiments with generative were brief so I really didn’t give myself a chance to get proficient with it, but it was slow and fiddly to get up and running and then the end result was always kind of the same sounding.
3 Likes
I like to be in control of the process, even if there is stochastic stuff going on.
1 Like
I don’t really make music to release or perform for others so my feeling may be a little different. When I am making music, even as a guitar player, I’ve always been an improviser and not much of a composer. When I’ve used “generative” tools, it’s almost always been very enjoyable. My entire purpose for making music is my own enjoyment / a kind of self-therapy, so I don’t have any negative feelings about letting machines do some things for me. However, if I used that stuff all the time, I think I’d get bored very quickly! It’s fun to incorporate into tracks I’m working on occasionally, but I don’t think I’d enjoy trying to make a long and interesting piece of music with only “generative” sequences, sounds, etc.
I also have a pretty broad definition of generative. I think S&H is close to that line. The [PAGE]+[YES] functions on Syntakt to randomize the page are arguably generative, since you’re letting the machine decide parameters for you until you land on something you like. It generated a part of the sound you end up using. And I think that’s quite fun - I wish more synthesizers had the option to randomize patches.
My feelings might would be different if I had worked in a “music production environment” or had high expectations of finishing tracks and releasing polished music. I think those things kind of demand a lot more control and precision from producers and musicians. I think there are some pretty advanced sequence generators out there these days that give you a lot of control, but I don’t know much about the topic.
4 Likes
This concept is even more foreign to me than the generative question, but man am I so jealous of it.
I WISH I could make music just for the sheer enjoyment of it. It seems so pure
2 Likes
Iv bought a digital piano for pianoteq, whilst buying swam instruments. So setup has gone to all diferent types of acoustic instruments but only with potential midi for pianos and some instruments that dont need pitch bend and generally just gaining audio tracks.
but before finishing setup.
Bought Neon sequencer for ipad.
Its easy enough to write generative to main sequencer anyway.
1 Like
for me — both.
intent phrases/beats with generative variations.
generative stuff is fun to use, but fun to use ≠ fun to listen/dance to.
2 Likes
Yup, I’m in this camp.
Additionally, I like using generated sequences as a way of learning, discovering things I’d not have come up with myself, and dissecting them to understand why they work.
This topic is pretty timely since I’ve finally gotten around to learning how to code on my Norns and have been creating some little tools that generate sequences out of “controlled randomness”.
But there’s also something to say about the “human” element, that touch of creativity that adds life to the sound.
I choose both 
4 Likes
Generative is the only sequencing that really interests me nowadays- when making my own stuff. If I punch in something x0x style or draw it in a piano roll/ableton clip or whatever I get absolutely nothing at all from the process. It just feels so dry and stale. But I hasten to add that I only make my own generative sequencing tools, and I ensure that the intentionality is in there 100%- no random/noise generators, as I feel they are too easy to fall back on, often dont produce (subjectively) good sounding results, and cannot be replicated. For me the beauty in generative sequencing is in devising a well thought-out algorithm and seeing/hearing that creation come to life. I can’t use something that someone else has made tho, as it doesn’t feel like my own acheivement. ~Im sure Torso etc are great, and there are indeed many wonderful M4L devices that do interesting things, but there’s no sense in achievement in using those, as the crazy stuff that they spit out isn’t of my design, its someone else’s, and just because ive hit ‘play’ doesn’t make it mine either.
I agree, but id point out that generative doesn’t necessarily = random
7 Likes
this is a much more succinct version of my overly-long post!
2 Likes
I don’t like the term generative. It doesn’t really mean anything.
If all you mean by generative is the old Turing Machines through a quantizer borefest, then yeah, generative music is shit.
There’s nothing particularly interesting to me about simply quantizing random voltages.
For me, it’s chaos that really holds the key. Chaotic systems are fucking great for making music with. Rob Hordijk knew it, Meng Qi knows it, that mad Australian guy behind Nonlinear circuits knows it.
Have a look at Simon Hutchinson’s YouTube channel, he’s done loads of stuff about non-linearity, chaos and artificial neurons, all of which can be harnessed to make incredibly complex and interesting sequencing methods.
I’ve been building chaotic stuff in Max for a while, none of it is really finished yet (mostly because I keep distracting myself with Octatracks) and I’m mostly using it to generate sound instead of sequences, but it can all be applied to pretty much any aspect of composition you want.
The master of chaotic sequencing (for me) is Russell Haswell. Man’s a fucking genius, don’t know why he’s not everyone’s favourite artist on here…
7 Likes
When Eurorackin´, I really like generative sequencers. But then I chop it up, rearrange it with intent I guess …?
I think also you can massage the sounds and the sequencer a lot. Choose maybe how things trigger the envelopes,filters together with the sequencer etc.
But I am not a schooled musician, so I never have any idea what will happen when I make a song. Even if I play a synth, I will mess with it pretty randomly on a sampler until I am happy with the result.
At least in the beginning stage.
When I am painting, I also like to start by going totally random with paint until I see something I can work with, and then I work towards that idea, vibe I spotted during the chaos.
If that makes any sense.
9 Likes
I think The OP-Z strikes a great middle ground between intention and unintention(?)
one great example is that you can set the bass track and chord track to play a random pitch at selected intervals.
The example would be, i set Bass track to play a C3 note, i then set the chord track to play a C major chord. The Master track is going to automatically set the scale to be C major, any pitch randomization i do will now be in C major scale.
The even cooler part is that if i now set the pitch randomizer to have the same settings on the bass and chord track, the bass track will now play the root note of the randomized chord!
with this set up i can now set so that the pitch randomization isn´t triggered every 1st out of 4 times.
This means that i now have a 4 bar semi random chord progression which always starts with a C major chord.
or you can go full tilt like i do in this video (video name trigger warning = “tHiS iS nOt AuTeChRe”)
In Eurorack, Marbles is really cool for both intent and unintent(?)
to strike a semi random feel i usually feed it a CV and gate signal for it to sample and distribute to the rest of the rack, with this i can really manipulate a sequence in many ways .
6 Likes
with this said, ive always struggled with intent, because i want to create with intent, but i often fall back on the tools i have for randomization.
Ive found the best way for me is to do something random and sample it into OT, where i develope it with intent.
5 Likes
I’ve got a theory on this:
Did you start out as an electronic artist? Or do you have a songwriter origin?
1 Like
i started as a songwriter and i think i already agree with your theory even though i haven´t heard it yet 
1 Like
Well, my theory is null now 
I started as a folk musician with a studio in a box. So the seed of creation was formed mostly from playing instruments.
The concept of art came from designing everything- which is why I SPENT SO MUCH MONEY ON HARDWARE WHEN I GOT INTO ELECTRONIC MUSIC instead of software, because I needed that tactile process in the art creation
maybe i should reiterate what i meant.
The struggle i have with intent is that i want to create with intent but i always fall back on generative tools, because im a lazy slob who should be ashamed of him self.
i also got into the electronic side of music wanting to have tactile experiences while creating music, but i probably got a litlle lost in the sauce.
1 Like
SAME! And it was the trauma of working with a studio in a box that had my first electronic releases being single pattern loops on Elektrons
1 Like