Just be clear about the direction you are going in, right now you are not actually saying anything, if 8 tracks is going to be the max then be clear about it, it just saves people wasting time learning and using the software, I have no idea about how refunds work on the app store, but i am sure we are all past that possibility now, so you have nothing to lose by just stating once and for all if 8 banks is where it is at, it is your software, you do not have to pander to any of us, but if the software is going in that direction then some of us can just move on and forget it as a viable host.
@Heyez
8 tracks is a joke for a sequencer in 2017, as a drum machine it is good enough, but if it is just going to be a drum machine then i would prefer it to be an AUv3, so i can load it in to a real sequencer.
@philowerx maybe not cool to leak beta version info dude? Some beta features may get cancelled or improved etc
@5pinlink you made your point dude. Maybe BM3 just isn't the app for you... Plenty of other linear daw options out there No one is forcing you to use it.. We can all make feature requests and intua are listening and interacting. Your requests/bug reports are nearly always wrapped up in a sentence also containing 'this is totally useless' tho.. Hardly the way to make people that have worked hard on something wanna help you out..
I have a feeling that intua will fix things up in a way that it'll work just as well as bm2 for those basic fundamental things people are missing, but the constant complaining and 'this app sucks and is totally useless cos it doesn't work exactly like I want' is tiring to read...it doesn't work exactly how anyone wants yet but other people are behaving way less entitled about it. No one that is behind the banks system is against the functionality you're asking for. It's not a bunch of people saying 'ignore the bm2 crowd'. Just a bunch of people saying that with time and tweaks the banks/pads system can be the same solution. Patience..
I never even used Maschine (people mentioning it the other thread). But I dig BM3's bank system a lot, potentially at least. Intua are a tiny team, maybe give em a bit of a break/take a minute to see what they already achieved with BM3, it's a big step forward, and just leave the app alone until it's had a little time to mature and ticks your boxes... Calling it 'just a drum machine' is ridiculous... Yesterday in a bank I had 4 instances of isem + fx + samples, all linked layered and modulated to make a HUGE pad which I could then solo and mute between voices, polyphonically and with timestrech on the samples...recorded in to timeline sequencer in a linear fashion for 3 minutes in one take no problems. Doesn't sound like a drum machine to me?
The apps only been out a couple of weeks! People need to chill and just have fun with what's already there until the other stuff arrives... Use bm2 in the meantime if need be, it still exists
Yeah I've actually +1'd a bunch of your ideas and bug reports @5pinlink be a shame to leave over literally nothing...
There's no need to do everything in extremes stay on the forum dude, just relaxxxxx a little
@heyez
What ?
After the diatribe above about the way i post, and throwing insults around calling people immature, you call it literally nothing ?
I am a bad asset, it is that simple, i will not pander to you or any developer, if something is useless it is useless, and i will state it as so, but note, i do not just say "This is useless" I back it up with the exact reason why it is useless for whatever purpose, example...
The sampler is currently completely useless for creating synth patches, why, because you have no singular control over anything, so if i create a 3 oscillator synth preset (3 layers) i have no singular control over the filter or gain, so doing simple things like change the attack of the synth takes the adjustment of 3 dials, all of which are on separate pages, this is useless for creating synth presets, this is not opinion, it is not debatable, it is fact.
Then i give some ideas to fix it, which i am not going to go in to because i wont be posting bug reports or feature requests anymore, you have taken it upon yourself to be Intuas spokesman obviously, even giving beta testers a telling off, so i will do as you say and STFU
Haha.. The sampler/banks/pads system is plenty capable for creating synth patches! Almost infinitely. You just focus on limitations instead of possibilities... You prove my point about your attitude by calling it 'completely useless'... Might not do exactly what you want yet, doesn't make it useless.... And if you can't do exactly what you want with the sampler, use plugin synths til the things you want are added.
In the other thread you insinuated beta testers were either making bad requests (basically any that weren't in line with yours....) or intua were just ignoring people. You think it's cool to throw that kind of stuff around? Like your opinion is the only correct one and intua can magically make all this stuff appear instantly? I've agreed on most of your feature requests fwiw.
I wasn't telling off beta testers at all. Just saying that normally that info isn't shared publicly cos it can lead to disappointment if beta features don't make it to the final version (for instance the Op1 final release arpeggio got crippled compared to the beta version. People were pissed cos they had knowledge of the way it 'could' have been..) and can also lead to pointless public speculation/criticism about things that will possibly get improved before deemed ready for that kind of scrutiny/judgement. Think about it...
I never said STFU. Just that it wasnt neccessary to be so dramatically negative about stuff after the app has only been our for 2 weeks.. Everyone is making requests/bug reports etc but you're all 'oh this is unbelievable! It's not finished already! I'm off!'....
I wasn't taking it upon myself to be intua's spokesman at all. Petty/nonsense thing to say... I was just saying give em a break and maybe try to throw a little less of the 'totally useless' comments around. They aren't neccessary. Just make requests without the bitching/drama. It won't help them with BM3 sales to throw stuff like that around on the forum. Which in turn won't help with updates or the company to grow and them be in a better position to be able to make you happy faster...
"The sampler is currently completely useless for creating synth patches, why, because you have no singular control over anything, so if i create a 3 oscillator synth preset (3 layers) i have no singular control over the filter or gain, so doing simple things like change the attack of the synth takes the adjustment of 3 dials, all of which are on separate pages, this is useless for creating synth presets, this is not opinion, it is not debatable, it is fact"
@5pinlink also, Im not in front of BM3 to check but can't you just assign each layer's respective parameters to the same macros? So you have your singular knob/s without having to switch sample layer pages? Seems like it would offer the functionality you're looking for?
But they do. I just checked. You said you want to be able to adjust gain/attack etc across all layers with one knob. Macros can do this right? Unless I missed something... Only checked quickly but looked like no prob...
AHDSR for amp
AHDSR for filter
Filter
LFO for Filter
That is you 16 macros gone, you can add no more, if you want a trance gate, cant be done, the sliders on the step modulator can't be macro'd, most of the LFO controls can't be macro'd, some of the filter controls can't be macro'd the list goes on and on, but maybe my version of synthesis is different to yours.
For a 3 oscillator synth this is....
6 Envelopes
3 Filters
3 LFO
Instead of...
2 Envelopes
1 Filter
1 LFO
On a platform that is not known for having lots of spare CPU resources.
That is not useful, so by definition it is useless, just because you do not like the word useless, does not make it any less useless.
It is very easy to fix, but there is no point fixing it if it is to just stay a drum sampler, it works perfectly for that.
16 macros per bank considering you can have up to 128 instruments is not enough once the tweaking starts.
The 'pad/instrument structure' needs more flexibility when it comes to sharing modulators across layers as well as routing audio from the different layers to enable the layers to pass thru a number of 'processing blocks'(filters etc.). One solution would be to have a modular approach to creating the instruments, add as many filters, amps and oscillators as needed and route them on a need to use basis...
If you want ALL params to be limited to only being adjustable in equal measure by one knob for all layers, just resample your layers to one layer...
You're always gonna find something to complain about so let's just quit before the thread is derailed. It's 'useless' trying to make you see anything other than problems..
Resample the layers ?
Do you even understand the idea of synthesis ?
It is useless trying to converse with you when you ignore the fact entirely that this is about synthesis, which is what i originally typed "The sampler is currently completely useless for creating synth patches" to which you took umbrage and tried to prove me wrong and failed, then tried to top it off with "just resample your layers to one layer"
So it is no longer a synth patch but now a sample patch where the individual shapes can no longer be mixed or tuned.
I pointed something out, and all you have done is complain about the way i pointed it out, and now you try to claim that i will always find something to complain about, when quite clearly i can back up all my claims and you can not.
But again, i bow to your superior knowledge and insults.
@5pinlink don't patronise me. There are plenty of one Osc synths... Bouncing layers wouldn't make it any less 'synthesis'... People are still getting hyped on single cycle waveforms synthesis on Digitakt... That does almost zero in comparison to BM3. Having 4 layers is a bonus. You want everything and instantly. Instead of focusing on just being creative with what's available right now....
Whatever tho man. You go focus on the problems/limitations while I make do with what's there.. Which is a lot already
@Heyez saving pad instruments seems like a very logical choice, especially for multilayered instruments with fx chains. Is it technically possible?
@everyone I know this is a cop out excuse but to put it in perspective, BM3 costs a fraction of what something like Renoise or Ableton or Fruity Loops costs, and it's here today on IOS! Native Instruments gave us only 4 tracks and no Midi. Akai produced a sampler without polyphony. Intua has delivered what the larger corporations wouldn't and at an affordable price.
Wow....what a read. All i wanna say is good job @mathieugarcia. You gotta habe thick skin to do this job. I see the passion from a few people and i love it. BM3 will never satisfy everyone, this is what eveyone need to understand.
@5pinlink
I've watched, enjoyed and learned from the content you've put up and I usually enjoy your comments when you're discussing in a technical and rational manner, but Jesus fuck - your uncompromising, bottomless negativity towards BM3 is bringing down every BM3 discussion both here and on the AB boards. Chin up man!!!!
@mathieugarcia I just want to raise a voice for how fantastically awesome and creatively fulfilling I'm finding BM3 - yeah of course there are many tweaks and refinements that I'm sure you're aware of and already have in mind. Granted - amongst the personal preference being very strongly voiced, there are genuine limitations being pointed out and valid suggestions for changes being made, but I personally hope that while you'll surely take insight and inspiration from the 'noise', that you'll stick to your vision and not be blown off course by the pressure of the crowd.
Having brought us this far, I trust your judgement completely and am excited to see what will come with time.
The instrument idea is for simplicity in my work flow, racking and stacking in pads and banks I'm all for been doing that on iOS and machine for years now grown to love it. For me there is something about knowing that channel is just a keyboard and nothing else and not wondering if I have stuck something else in that bank. Also I was able to see the keyboard midi on the screen when playing patterns together that helped a lot for me with timing and editing. I like simple and what bm3 has done is excellent and everything I wanted. New program new learning curves and adaptations. I'll get a work flow down and excel at it.
One thing that would be cool is being able to select another midi track when midi window is open. Say channel 1 I'm editing and I see a row of numbers on the left I can hit channel two and midi pops up for that track so I don't have to go out another two windows just to go back to channel two midi for edit.
@mathieugarcia So umm.. ya. I look forward to some future distinction between Banks (useful for drums and oneshots) and instrument tracks (for AUV3). This way several instruments won't get clustered in a single pattern, and we can save custom instruments/chains without wasting limited banks/pads. Thats all THIS thread is SUPPOSED to be about.
@jblongz said:
So umm.. ya. I look forward to some future distinction between Banks (useful for drums and oneshots) and instrument tracks (for AUV3). This way several instruments won't get clustered in a single pattern, and we can save custom instruments/chains without wasting limited banks/pads. Thats all THIS thread is SUPPOSED to be about.
I'd like to take this idea one step further as I see Samples (one-shots, drums, instruments), AUv3's, IAA's and Midi-Ports as 'Instruments in a rack'.
The '16/64' pads view to me is just another way to trigger & play selected instruments in the rack.
The 'bank' to me is more like 'group of instruments' selected from the instrument rack.
The 'bank' could also be seen as a 'sub-group'.
When performing with the 16/64 pads view each pad would record to it's own track and on the time-line it could be seen as a 'track folder' as it in practice already is a 'sub-group'.
Each Instrument could in practice be driven by multiple tracks by routing the tracks output to an instrument.
Each instrument could also 'listen' to another track for easy layering.
This would give great flexibility for routing. One track could drive multiple instruments or an instrument could be driven from multiple tracks. This would also open the door for pure 'controller tracks' that only feed controller/automation data to an instrument.
The 'sub-groups' and free routing would be a real boom in the audio-mixer as well...
Comments
Just be clear about the direction you are going in, right now you are not actually saying anything, if 8 tracks is going to be the max then be clear about it, it just saves people wasting time learning and using the software, I have no idea about how refunds work on the app store, but i am sure we are all past that possibility now, so you have nothing to lose by just stating once and for all if 8 banks is where it is at, it is your software, you do not have to pander to any of us, but if the software is going in that direction then some of us can just move on and forget it as a viable host.
@Heyez
8 tracks is a joke for a sequencer in 2017, as a drum machine it is good enough, but if it is just going to be a drum machine then i would prefer it to be an AUv3, so i can load it in to a real sequencer.
Let's stay constructive here:
Cheers.
@5pinlink you made your point dude. Maybe BM3 just isn't the app for you... Plenty of other linear daw options out there
I have a feeling that intua will fix things up in a way that it'll work just as well as bm2 for those basic fundamental things people are missing, but the constant complaining and 'this app sucks and is totally useless cos it doesn't work exactly like I want' is tiring to read...it doesn't work exactly how anyone wants yet but other people are behaving way less entitled about it. No one that is behind the banks system is against the functionality you're asking for. It's not a bunch of people saying 'ignore the bm2 crowd'. Just a bunch of people saying that with time and tweaks the banks/pads system can be the same solution. Patience..
I never even used Maschine (people mentioning it the other thread). But I dig BM3's bank system a lot, potentially at least. Intua are a tiny team, maybe give em a bit of a break/take a minute to see what they already achieved with BM3, it's a big step forward, and just leave the app alone until it's had a little time to mature and ticks your boxes... Calling it 'just a drum machine' is ridiculous... Yesterday in a bank I had 4 instances of isem + fx + samples, all linked layered and modulated to make a HUGE pad which I could then solo and mute between voices, polyphonically and with timestrech on the samples...recorded in to timeline sequencer in a linear fashion for 3 minutes in one take no problems. Doesn't sound like a drum machine to me?
The apps only been out a couple of weeks! People need to chill and just have fun with what's already there until the other stuff arrives... Use bm2 in the meantime if need be, it still exists
I bow to your obviously superior knowledge
@mathieugarcia delete my account and all my posts please, thanks.
I don't know, I feel you are a good asset to have here on the forums? Plenty of bug reports, the tutorials, you often make a point too...
There's no need to do everything in extremes
@heyez
What ?
After the diatribe above about the way i post, and throwing insults around calling people immature, you call it literally nothing ?
I am a bad asset, it is that simple, i will not pander to you or any developer, if something is useless it is useless, and i will state it as so, but note, i do not just say "This is useless" I back it up with the exact reason why it is useless for whatever purpose, example...
The sampler is currently completely useless for creating synth patches, why, because you have no singular control over anything, so if i create a 3 oscillator synth preset (3 layers) i have no singular control over the filter or gain, so doing simple things like change the attack of the synth takes the adjustment of 3 dials, all of which are on separate pages, this is useless for creating synth presets, this is not opinion, it is not debatable, it is fact.
Then i give some ideas to fix it, which i am not going to go in to because i wont be posting bug reports or feature requests anymore, you have taken it upon yourself to be Intuas spokesman obviously, even giving beta testers a telling off, so i will do as you say and STFU
In the other thread you insinuated beta testers were either making bad requests (basically any that weren't in line with yours....) or intua were just ignoring people. You think it's cool to throw that kind of stuff around? Like your opinion is the only correct one and intua can magically make all this stuff appear instantly? I've agreed on most of your feature requests fwiw.
I wasn't telling off beta testers at all. Just saying that normally that info isn't shared publicly cos it can lead to disappointment if beta features don't make it to the final version (for instance the Op1 final release arpeggio got crippled compared to the beta version. People were pissed cos they had knowledge of the way it 'could' have been..) and can also lead to pointless public speculation/criticism about things that will possibly get improved before deemed ready for that kind of scrutiny/judgement. Think about it...
I never said STFU. Just that it wasnt neccessary to be so dramatically negative about stuff after the app has only been our for 2 weeks.. Everyone is making requests/bug reports etc but you're all 'oh this is unbelievable! It's not finished already! I'm off!'....
I wasn't taking it upon myself to be intua's spokesman at all. Petty/nonsense thing to say... I was just saying give em a break and maybe try to throw a little less of the 'totally useless' comments around. They aren't neccessary. Just make requests without the bitching/drama. It won't help them with BM3 sales to throw stuff like that around on the forum. Which in turn won't help with updates or the company to grow and them be in a better position to be able to make you happy faster...
@5pinlink also, Im not in front of BM3 to check but can't you just assign each layer's respective parameters to the same macros? So you have your singular knob/s without having to switch sample layer pages? Seems like it would offer the functionality you're looking for?
A macro will do what i suggest, yes i bow to your superior knowledge and personal insults.
Really ? that was sarcasm, of course macros wont do what i suggest.
AHDSR for amp
AHDSR for filter
Filter
LFO for Filter
That is you 16 macros gone, you can add no more, if you want a trance gate, cant be done, the sliders on the step modulator can't be macro'd, most of the LFO controls can't be macro'd, some of the filter controls can't be macro'd the list goes on and on, but maybe my version of synthesis is different to yours.
For a 3 oscillator synth this is....
6 Envelopes
3 Filters
3 LFO
Instead of...
2 Envelopes
1 Filter
1 LFO
On a platform that is not known for having lots of spare CPU resources.
That is not useful, so by definition it is useless, just because you do not like the word useless, does not make it any less useless.
It is very easy to fix, but there is no point fixing it if it is to just stay a drum sampler, it works perfectly for that.
16 macros per bank considering you can have up to 128 instruments is not enough once the tweaking starts.
The 'pad/instrument structure' needs more flexibility when it comes to sharing modulators across layers as well as routing audio from the different layers to enable the layers to pass thru a number of 'processing blocks'(filters etc.). One solution would be to have a modular approach to creating the instruments, add as many filters, amps and oscillators as needed and route them on a need to use basis...
You're always gonna find something to complain about so let's just quit before the thread is derailed. It's 'useless' trying to make you see anything other than problems..
Resample the layers ?
Do you even understand the idea of synthesis ?
It is useless trying to converse with you when you ignore the fact entirely that this is about synthesis, which is what i originally typed "The sampler is currently completely useless for creating synth patches" to which you took umbrage and tried to prove me wrong and failed, then tried to top it off with "just resample your layers to one layer"
So it is no longer a synth patch but now a sample patch where the individual shapes can no longer be mixed or tuned.
I pointed something out, and all you have done is complain about the way i pointed it out, and now you try to claim that i will always find something to complain about, when quite clearly i can back up all my claims and you can not.
But again, i bow to your superior knowledge and insults.
Whatever tho man. You go focus on the problems/limitations while I make do with what's there.. Which is a lot already
@Heyez saving pad instruments seems like a very logical choice, especially for multilayered instruments with fx chains. Is it technically possible?
@everyone I know this is a cop out excuse but to put it in perspective, BM3 costs a fraction of what something like Renoise or Ableton or Fruity Loops costs, and it's here today on IOS! Native Instruments gave us only 4 tracks and no Midi. Akai produced a sampler without polyphony. Intua has delivered what the larger corporations wouldn't and at an affordable price.
I've watched, enjoyed and learned from the content you've put up and I usually enjoy your comments when you're discussing in a technical and rational manner, but Jesus fuck - your uncompromising, bottomless negativity towards BM3 is bringing down every BM3 discussion both here and on the AB boards. Chin up man!!!!
Having brought us this far, I trust your judgement completely and am excited to see what will come with time.
One thing that would be cool is being able to select another midi track when midi window is open. Say channel 1 I'm editing and I see a row of numbers on the left I can hit channel two and midi pops up for that track so I don't have to go out another two windows just to go back to channel two midi for edit.
@mathieugarcia So umm.. ya. I look forward to some future distinction between Banks (useful for drums and oneshots) and instrument tracks (for AUV3). This way several instruments won't get clustered in a single pattern, and we can save custom instruments/chains without wasting limited banks/pads. Thats all THIS thread is SUPPOSED to be about.
+1
Said so perfectly
I'd like to take this idea one step further as I see Samples (one-shots, drums, instruments), AUv3's, IAA's and Midi-Ports as 'Instruments in a rack'.
The '16/64' pads view to me is just another way to trigger & play selected instruments in the rack.
The 'bank' to me is more like 'group of instruments' selected from the instrument rack.
The 'bank' could also be seen as a 'sub-group'.
When performing with the 16/64 pads view each pad would record to it's own track and on the time-line it could be seen as a 'track folder' as it in practice already is a 'sub-group'.
Each Instrument could in practice be driven by multiple tracks by routing the tracks output to an instrument.
Each instrument could also 'listen' to another track for easy layering.
This would give great flexibility for routing. One track could drive multiple instruments or an instrument could be driven from multiple tracks. This would also open the door for pure 'controller tracks' that only feed controller/automation data to an instrument.
The 'sub-groups' and free routing would be a real boom in the audio-mixer as well...
+1 on that Samu post. Intuiively I see the UI as racks and groups like that.