Hi all,
I’m trying to figure out, if the following will work:
I have a long sample sliced, into 16 slices and have a 16 step pattern. Step 1 has a trigger.
I have a LFO 1 mapped to the strt parameter. The waveform is coming from the LFO designer.
Is it possible to modulate the strt (sample start) with the lfo designer, so it changes every 1/16 note?
Thanks
Set the lfo speed to 1 bar (speed 16, mult 8, I think), use mode “sync trig” (to sync the lfo with the pattern) and each of the 16 sections of the lfo designer will be a 1/16th note basically.
The lfo basically works like a mod sequencer with 16 steps with those settings.
You’ll want to understand the relationship between the values you set in the LFO Designer, the Depth of the LFO, and how that maps to the Start parameter.
I do wonder if you’ll want a trig on each 16th note that will change the start point based on the LFO value. Without that I’m not sure what resetting the start point gets you.
Every 16th or every bar ?
I played around with this a bit. One thing to keep in mind when working with the mapping from LFO values to slice values is that slices go from 1 to 64 and the LFO ranges from -128 to 127.
For 16 slices, I found that LFO values of 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, …, 31 mapped to slices 1, 2, 3, 4, … 16.
Lfo depth set to 127 I suppose?
Depending on how you set track parameter slice 1 (there are 2 internal values), values can be 0, 2, 4…30. More logical to me to use these values.
Yes, depth at max to get the right values. A fun performance option is to vary the depth so that the range of slices used varies.
For whatever reason my brain finds
LFO = 2*Slice - 1
easier to quickly identify than
LFO = 2*(Slice - 1)
.
As you say, both work.
My brain says
Lfo = 2*Slice - 2
And it actually work better with 0,2,4 etc if you set first slice on position b I mentioned above. 1,3,5 is wrong in that case.
Same behavior for both with position a.
I compared the 2 possibilities with 2 different lfo designers. So I’d say the “-2” is safer.
Another potential issue with lfo on slices it that Sync Trig seems a bit late, some variations depending on jitter, or maybe Tempo values ?
I had perfect slices selection with Free mode, or setting Sync Trig speed to 33 instead of 32…Also worked perfectly with microtiming.
Weirdo…
I was using Amen Break, 64 slices grid without zero crossing, playing 16 slices on 1 bar at 137 bpm (original sample bpm).
Does it work ok at 140.6 bpm? That’s on my list of “well-behaved tempos.”
Doesn’t seem to change behavior. Sync Trig Lfo designer seems a bit late. I can share my sample if you want to make tests with same conditions…
I am really surprised that it works better at speed 33 than 32 (or 65 vs 64).
And it works perfectly with Sync Trig / Saw (with different settings due to bipolar behavior).
In the LFO designer are you smoothing the LFO or keeping it stepped?
Stepped. No reason to smooth imo.
I also tried depth 64 and values 0,4,8,etc…same behavior.
Now I want to test in a bipolar way…
I agree … though the Saw kind of is. 
I tried smooth, but anyway the right slice value has to be picked when the trig plays.
With stepped the weird thing is that playback is normal 1 cycle out of 2.
I also tried bipolar. May try 1,3,5 again !
I tried with 4 bars : the problem is definitely at pattern’s beginning, Sync Trig retrig maybe very slightly late…
With lfo designer.
I actually might have noticed something similar, but thought I misheard my playback. Unfortunately, I’m away from my Octatrack until Wednesday.
The sample I was working with had other issues that I need to deal with. I’m triggering my Moog with an OT MIDI track and the latency in that causes the captured sample to be slightly misaligned. I’ll probably add some negative microtiming on the MIDI track to compensate.
Ah. I edited the Amen Break to match a perfect grid, so it is obvious when off. I post my sample here if you want to try later (or anybody interested in 0T weirdness).
I think I could also record step lfo on something obvious and direct like VOL and compare with a square. Pretty sure lfo designer is “randomly” late with Sync Trig…
But I have to test something more fun on Tempera before !
If it is like the record buffer click stuff we worked through, I’ll bet we can figure out what drives that randomness.
Do we know much about the LFO timing? Values potentially updated every 64 samples?
If you shift the LFO pattern does the behavior shift or is it tied to a particular trig?
This is interesting and so specific. What other tempos behave well for you?
My bet it is at the beginning of Sync Trig trigger.