Ableton Forum

Impulse is a great instrument.Easy and quick to use.But needs a step forward.It be nice to see the ability to perform a different fx to each of the eight channel impulse has.Lets say I got a kick a hat and a snare and I want the hats with a flanger and the snares with a phaser and a little bit of delay.Why do I need to have three midi channels on to do that? Cant you make it with one? Theres no reverse button either.
p.s Mp3 rendering would come in handy! Thanx!

I agree. I think if racks could have seperate chains for each output, we would be set int eh FX department. (Maybe this is possible already?)

you can just make a rack with 8 impulse. 1 sample cell per impulse
so impulse 1 (chain 1)= kick (with only a kick drum loaded into cell 1)
impulse 2(chain 2)= snare (with only a snare sound loaded into cell 2, all other cells empty)
and then for each impulse chain you can choose which effects you want.
so imuplse 1 (chain 1) has a compressor for the kick only
impulse 2 (chain 2) has reverb and delay for snare only
than you can map to the 8 macrso whatever effects you want for controlling.
hope this makes sense

(or just use simpler, but I think this is just as easy)

Work around.
With 8 impulses the CPU went up.
you can't change the kit all at once.
you have to make macros for the global parameters you want to use and this took more time than I thought.
blah.
Not to mention switching chains to access each drum's parameters.

It works, I know but it's a real PIA. (for me).

I hear what you are saying.
something I do sometimes with my setup is I use 4 chains.
1 kick, 1 snare, 1 perc , 1 hats

I have cells 1 +2 for kick, 3+4 for snare, 5+6 for perc,7+8 for hats.
this way it is a little more compact, and would take a little less cpu, although on my machine the cpu is really minimal anyway.

Macro 1 = time for all impulses
Macro 2 = Transpose for all impulses
Macro 3 - 8 for anything else.

Then I save this instrument rack names as ImpulseCellFX.
I created a few different impulse kits of just kick sounds, just hat sounds, just snare sounds so that I can easliy hotswap these individual pieces of kit with the impulses in my ImpulseCellFX rack.

I know what you are saying, it is a workaround, and everyone has different styles, but I found that by putting in the extra little bit of effort to do this, I got mostly what I wanted .
i dont think it is that much more work to select samples for editing this way though. just a mouse click or a rotary that can select chains

theres an even easier way to put effects on an individual sample just load up an empty audio channel an open the input/output an in audio from choose the channel that has the impulse loaded an then below that you can choose the individual sample and thrn you put effects on that channel......

its in the user manual haha

the reason i prefer to do it my way is that i like to use as few tracks as possible. i just don't like the clutter when i am trying to mix.

Svetla wrote:I hear what you are saying.
something I do sometimes with my setup is I use 4 chains.
1 kick, 1 snare, 1 perc , 1 hats

I have cells 1 +2 for kick, 3+4 for snare, 5+6 for perc,7+8 for hats.
this way it is a little more compact, and would take a little less cpu, although on my machine the cpu is really minimal anyway.

Macro 1 = time for all impulses
Macro 2 = Transpose for all impulses
Macro 3 - 8 for anything else.

Then I save this instrument rack names as ImpulseCellFX.
I created a few different impulse kits of just kick sounds, just hat sounds, just snare sounds so that I can easliy hotswap these individual pieces of kit with the impulses in my ImpulseCellFX rack.

I know what you are saying, it is a workaround, and everyone has different styles, but I found that by putting in the extra little bit of effort to do this, I got mostly what I wanted .
i dont think it is that much more work to select samples for editing this way though. just a mouse click or a rotary that can select chains

I also like having very few tracks unless I am doing lots and lots of effect automation.
I am currently using the method above but it is kind of a pain the ass when it could be so simple.

If my make group from track seletion request got implemented, with track folding, I wouldn't need muti in racks as much. Although other people crazy about macros might.