Not what I expected

Status
Not open for further replies.
ok, big guess here but what if the automation is not at fault in the way you suggest, that, in fact, it is actually doing what it is supposed to do?

i.e. your expectation is at odds with reality

If I do what you say, (triangle starts high and goes low and reverses) my wobbles will be off the beat and most noticeable at the before and after the actual beat: that is to say the wobble is doing exactly what you have asked it to do - if you have any daw installed try starting the triangle in the middle and moving up then down you will be matching the even numbered 16th grid positions for high and low points and thisn should fix your perceived issues with beat placement
 
I had to give myself a laugh after typing that, but yes it doesn't take effort to use a drumpad controller man.
For those examples I uploaded, those were drawn with a mouse.
But the others can give you what you asked for since they showed up.
 
bandcoach the triangles were lined up on the grid... it looked just like a picture I drew in paint in page two of this thread...

can someone just make me a wav of just quarter note wobbling synth(drawn with envelope automation on the grid with points and triangles) and snare... so I can see if theres any difference between my system and your system in terms of synchronization between the midi and automation.... it would seriously take two minutes
 
Last edited:
I'm pretty sure the automation is doing what it's supposed to be doing. That automation pattern actually looks like it won't sound good, because of how simple and non-musical that thing looks. There's no curves of anything that resembles a groove in that envelope.

I could humor you and send you a file doing exactly what that does, but it'll have to be much later cause I'm off to work right now.
 
please do so wallengrad, just make sure its 20 measures long, has a second track with a quarter note snare, and the main track as a basic mono synth with the modulation I drew on volume and nothing else(just the snare and synth)

if you want to do me another favor so I can maybe prove my theory, make another clip where you take the automation and move it all late a 32nd note... you may see it sounds more in sync
 
Last edited:
I tried it three different ways (all 8th note transitions high to low to high (total length of one transition cycle = 1/4 note): on the 8th note grid, on the 16th grid, on the 32nd gird) in reason 6.5

The result for each was exactly what I expect: the wobble leads or lags the snare by between 32nd and an 8th
 
Last edited:
i'm not crazy, I know what I heard, and the automation was ahead of time

really depressing that you cant use the midi and envelope grids... it would be so easy to make music if you could

but I don't like the way midi sounds on a grid, and the envelopes are just plain ahead of the beat

maybe it would be worth a try with a pad controller and knobs lol

I think you meant... between a 32nd and 16th(although mathematically I suppose (1/8+1/32)÷2 is a measurement)
 
Last edited:
you just said yourself that when you do automation its ahead of the beat...

im confused now... I thought you were concurring with me
 
Last edited:
you misunderstand me - audio of what you experienced will allow us to understand what you heard and agree or disagree with what you perceive
 
well what are you saying?

"The result for each was exactly what I expect: the wobble leads or lags the snare by between 32nd and an 8th"

I don't have any software installed but I believe I heard the automation being ahead of the beat by greater than a 32nd note but smaller than a sixteenth note.

if you are saying that you think the automation is ahead of the beat... then aren't we in agreeal?
 
Last edited:
we are loggerheads because we are talking about different things now

I want to hear audio that you produce so that I can better understand what your problem is

you are still trying to question my statements about what happened when I did this in reason

install another piece of software like reaper (REAPER | Audio Production Without Limits) and do this one more time (with feeling :) )
 
do you think the automation you drew on the quantized envelope grid in reason was ahead of the beat yes/no?
 
Last edited:
I've told you that it wasn't ahead of the beat but behind the beat (as expected) although as you go further in you might be tricked into swapping place sin the stream to before the beat

however, the issue I have is that without audio for you we are very likely to be talking at cross purposes
 
you think its behind... but I think its ahead...

i'm not gonna argue but try to manually draw the automation so its late... you should hear it as being more in sync
 
Last edited:
I already did and reported my results above

as this is a thought experiment now (you are not going to give us any audio based on your last response) it is moot
 
you never said you tried drawing the modulation offset from the grid and late, and if you did it would contradict your belief that it is behind the beat... because you would just be making it more late

I thought it sounded ahead of the beat so I drew it late and it sounded better, I was suggesting you try drawing it late because I think maybe you are mistaken and its actually ahead the same way it was for me

well im going to bed I figured id let you know because we basically have been chatting in this thread for the past two hours
 
Last edited:
Since you goin to bed I'ls gonna put out an idea. After skimming this thread, wallengard made a good point.
Not every single melody/drumbeat/arpeggios is gonna react the same way to the same automated waveforms.
I just now realized that your question's answer was wallengard's dude, but you've been arguing for the sake of it.
What bandcoach put was actually correct too :/

I also just came to a realization that it actually depends entirely on what the sounds are too, which dictates the type of automation you draw.
Not everything's gonna sound good with the same automation parameters, that 8th/4th whatever note envelope would only give you a good/decent result with quantized stuff if it's divisable by similar numbers :O
 
I think the same way as dirtythirdbeats, the last tiny part of the volume envelope fading in is so close to the maximum value that you probably can't detect the difference, and you perceive it as being early.

You cant make a nice rhythmic wobble effect with a straight up triangle envelope like that and expect it to sound good. You need to use more curves, and let the 16th fade in before the peak be at half the value to give the upcoming peak some meaning.

Seriously forget about your static triangle envelope, it doesn't do what you want it to do because it does what it should. If you want that to sound good you need to experiment with different curves.

It's not that we disagree and say that it doesn't sound anything like you think it does. We are actually saying that you're hearing what you are hearing because that's how you made it sound, by drawing the envelope you did. It sounds exactly as it should.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top