Why doesn't beat mode detect transients rather than stretch?

[glitchrock-buddha]

Not so much a criticism, but more that I'm curious.

I don't see any benefit whatsoever though, so maybe it is somewhat critical, but I would like to know why.

If beat mode detected transients and then let us adjust the markers (just as it already does), then would it not result in better sound quality for beats, and also allow us to maintain the timing of the original beat? Currently it's a trade-off it seems. If the hit is too early, you'll get degraded sound quality on the attack in many cases, but if you move the marker back before the beat, then you're original timing is lost as it quantizes that hit, moving it forward.

I guess more to the point, my topic question may well have been: why must changing markers in beat mode change the timing? Could you not have one end marker designating the end of your loop (which is specified to be a certain number of bars), and maintain timing within?

This just frustrates me. Thoughts, opinions? I guess I should just get a slicer, but I like the clip envelope stuff.

[Of course for every other mode, it should stay the same.]

grb

[subterFUSE]

Why doesn't beat mode detect transients rather than stretch?

Because it sucks.

[bensuthers]

cpu

[Jim S.]

Not so much a criticism, but more that I'm curious.

I don't see any benefit whatsoever though, so maybe it is somewhat critical, but I would like to know why.

If beat mode detected transients and then let us adjust the markers (just as it already does), then would it not result in better sound quality for beats, and also allow us to maintain the timing of the original beat? Currently it's a trade-off it seems. If the hit is too early, you'll get degraded sound quality on the attack in many cases, but if you move the marker back before the beat, then you're original timing is lost as it quantizes that hit, moving it forward.

I guess more to the point, my topic question may well have been: why must changing markers in beat mode change the timing? Could you not have one end marker designating the end of your loop (which is specified to be a certain number of bars), and maintain timing within?

This just frustrates me. Thoughts, opinions? I guess I should just get a slicer, but I like the clip envelope stuff.

[Of course for every other mode, it should stay the same.]

grb

This is an EXCELLENT question and framing of the issue, in my opinion.

[glitchrock-buddha]

cpu

If you look at any beat slicing application (ex.phatmatik pro or even apple loops), it takes very little cpu. I can't see transient detection taking more cpu than beat mode 'stretching'.

btw, thanks Jim S.

grb

[rand]

I whole heartedly agree and been bitchin about this for years!

Yup, Appleloops do sound punchier because they do transient detection...
but alas don't have beat marking.
Live loops have beat marking but don't have transient detection...
Tis a major pity one of em doesn't do both.
tom

[djsynchro]

So you like your beats to play out of time? Interesting.

[Machinate]

cpu

If you look at any beat slicing application (ex.phatmatik pro or even apple loops), it takes very little cpu. I can't see transient detection taking more cpu than beat mode 'stretching'.

Phatmatik Pro doesn't do timestretching... at all! At best you can space out the sounds, but it'll leave gaps and so on, unless you're doing really creative looping with it, which in turn takes a lot of time and effort to get right.

Try loading up a full bar of regular music at 120 bpm in Phatmatik Pro. Drop it to 100 bpm and then tell me which you prefer!! The kinda gritty Beats mode or the "wonderful" Phatmatik loop, which is now 10% silence...!

[subterFUSE]

Bah....


My reason was best.

[dm_hawk]

Bah....


My reason was best.

agreed.

[glitchrock-buddha]

cpu

If you look at any beat slicing application (ex.phatmatik pro or even apple loops), it takes very little cpu. I can't see transient detection taking more cpu than beat mode 'stretching'.

Phatmatik Pro doesn't do timestretching... at all! At best you can space out the sounds, but it'll leave gaps and so on, unless you're doing really creative looping with it, which in turn takes a lot of time and effort to get right.

Try loading up a full bar of regular music at 120 bpm in Phatmatik Pro. Drop it to 100 bpm and then tell me which you prefer!! The kinda gritty Beats mode or the "wonderful" Phatmatik loop, which is now 10% silence...!

I know phatmatik pro doesn't time-stretch, that's my point, it detects transients, and yes I believe it sounds better (generally). Don't get me wrong, I often like the granular sounding stretched beat, but often want the drum hits to sound clean. A little silence at the end of slices does not bother me at all compared to a mutilated drum attack. That's why I think beat mode should detect transients. I've had to really alter the groove of a drum beat in order to not have certain drum hit attacks sound like shit (often when really slowing down a beat for trip-hop styles- this is not for your average dance music purposes).

I think we may have to agree to disagree, as your scenario is precisely the type of loop time altering I would do, and I'm telling you, I would quite often prefer the phatmatik pro sound. Yes, I could just go throw down cash for it I guess, but like I said previously, I like the loop envelope functions in Live.

It's just unfortunate that Live basically forces you to quantize a beat that you want to keep sounding clean when slowed down. Very unfortunate.
Apple loops are a good example of proper tempo adjustement, but once you've got an apple loop in Logic, you can't friggin' do anything with it! It just changes tempo. yippee.

So there. No?

regards,

grb

Code: Select all

[glitchrock-buddha]

So you like your beats to play out of time? Interesting.

So you like your physically played drumbeats to sound like a metronome? Interesting.

Never heard a drummer push the snare a little? flams?

Hey I like quantize as much as the next guy, but there is much to be said for human groove. much.

grb

[Poster]

edit..

[glitchrock-buddha]

why is BR always mentioned in one sentence with the word slicer?
BR is not a slicer..
It's a repeater..

Agreed there are 'other' (not 'better') plugs arround that do a more complex job..

I really like BR alot; simple, effective and it sounds good..
Did you ever try to actually get in control over Suppatrigga and alikes? Terrible..

I always feel that Suppatrigga cheats for you,
and BR you have to play a bit before it starts cheating..

My way of using it in a more 'complex' fashion is to stack em up using different settings..
In L6 BR becomes even more powerfull and controlable by stacking em up in racks..

But agreed; some new features and/or enhancements would be nice..

you lost me there man. Where where we talking about beat repeat? I'm not talking about that (or any of those beat manglers, which are good fun) at all. I'm very happy with that.

Only talking about the actual method of tempo adjustment to fit a loop to the sond tempo, specifically beat mode. The other modes are nice, granular loveliness. Complex modes is kinda cool, but too cpu heavy. But for drum beat purposes, beat mode (or complex for that matter) just don't quite cut it imo.

And I'm just wondering why on earth it was designed to function this way. I see no purpose for automatic grid chopping when transient detection seems to work for so many other plugs/apps. Clean sound, no necessary groove adjustment.

[Poster]

you lost me there man. Where where we talking about beat repeat?

I'am very sorry man..
It was kinda late and was on the phone while reading/replying..
I have red 'beat repeat mode' instead of 'beat mode'


*slowly hides under the desk*