Model:Cycles Q & A with Ess

[AdamJay]

Just moved a handful of posts/discussion to the feature requests thread.

This thread is not for feature requests.

Like Ess said:

my idea with this thread was more to give you some insight that can’t be found elsewhere if there was interest.

Titled edited to denote that this isn’t a general request/discussion thread.

[PersianHugs]

Is coronavirus going to impact production of model cycles?

[craig]

Any idea when M:C second batch will be ready? Gotta capitalise on the current hype

[plusn]

@Ess Are there Plans for a Cycles Drum Soundpack for all samplebased Elektron Machines?

[g8tr1522]

NUDGE question.

When NUDGE is set to 23/-23, does that fully nudge it into the next step? Or is it slightly off?

I’ve been using NUDGE with the FILL condition. I’m probably imagining it, but it sounds like the step is slightly off.

If it doesn’t fully move it to the next step, it should. That would let you have some interesting possibilities with trig conditions. And if there’s a conflict, and two or three steps evaluate to true, it should be the left-most step that triggers.
Sorry if that turned into a feature request.

[avantronica]

does that fully nudge it into the next step?

Nope

Octatrack Tips & Tricks (OT Tips)

It’s 23 of 384 (384 midi seq clicks per bar from 96 ppqn [24ppqn for MIDI beat clock, int seq is 4 times higher res] ) - so it’s the finest step resolution that steps can be shifted towards, but not overlapping, the neighbouring seq step may have been neater to write 23/24, but it is what it is I guess edit: adding a figure for future ref - so you see that 2 and 3 can almost swap places [Micro timing]

If it doesn’t fully move it to the next step, it should.

With TRCs this could be powerful for a few use cases, but it’s probably restricted to avoid the confusion of overlapping neighbouring quantized trigs and a few other conceptual headaches. Would be nice if doable

[g8tr1522]

That microtiming picture definitely clears it up, thanks.

Yeah, that’s fine for most uses, but at slower tempos, it sounds very slightly off. There are tricks to get around this, but it’d be nice to have at the same exact step.

But yeah, it would be tricky to handle the midi for that. On the unit itself though, you just do a priority selection with the left-most or right-most step getting the most priority. Doesn’t have to be more complicated than that.

[nfim]

hey @Ess is there any way to watch your FM workshop? I missed the live stream!

[AdamJay]

FM workshop livestream + Live/DJ sets

Yes, you can re-watch here: https://www.twitch.tv/ess_mtsn/videos As the Cycles main focus is percussion I think it’s fine that it doesn’t have an attack envelope, and the LFO trick works - paired with the kinda crazy controls and parameter locks you can get a lot of movement with that setup anyway. But I do see the desire of it, however the limited parameter set is what gets in the way - many have asked for Func + Decay for attack, but how would you then parameter lock it? And it would be m…

[darenager]

many have asked for Func + Decay for attack, but how would you then parameter lock it?

How about envelope macros? First half of values are instant attack with progressively longer decay, second half are introducing attack with both progressively longer attack and decay. 127 types of “preset” envelopes might be a good compromise?

[avantronica]

interesting approach - but if you ctrl all your decays and suddenly get attack happening it would be potentially undesired - i think having variations of machine types could be an option with no backwards compatibility issues - so add a ToneAttack m/c or a ChordA m/c with sensible ‘presets’ as discussed above, so that you have the option to keep attack(or lack of) where it is desired

[tallrobphilp]

The dual LP/HP filter on the M:S potentially has the same issue but I think it’s just part of the experimental nature of control all. I could live with it!

[darenager]

Yeah maybe but as @tallrobphilp says experimental could be fun, plus if it gets too out of hand hit reload.

Another idea might be to limit on a per pattern basis which track/params ignore ctrl-all.

[pselodux]

how would you then parameter lock it? And it would be missing from the panel - it’s a lot to consider in the end. (Also the design principles of the Model:Series goes against secondary functions for the most part)

A “slow” switch in the TRK menu maybe? Switching it on makes the envelope symmetrical, with equal time for attack and decay.

[Seta]

I replied in the same thread, to me just 2 or 3 settings DFAM like via menu (FAST/MEDIUM/SLOW, which could be shared with the LFO Menu) would be the easiest and maybe less DSP resource intensive. Could also be p-locked like all other LFO parameters.

In DFAM there is just two settings and that already makes a big difference sound design wise…

[AdamJay]

For some reason the attack conversation has been brought over into this thread, when all I was doing was linking the post with the workshop recording link for @nfim
Use THAT thread for that conversation.

Let’s all collectively get back to the intent of this thread, Q&A for Ess, and limit our own break off conversations.

The forum software hasn’t been cooperative lately with regard to moving posts into other more appropriate threads, so us mods need the help of everyone in this thread to keep it tidy.

Thanks!