3 ms·
Isn't this fundamentally describing an arpeggiator? Using Reaper I made a simple arpeggiator extension: it takes input from one track for the chords and from a
by bambax 5y ago
Isn't this fundamentally describing an arpeggiator?
Using Reaper I made a simple arpeggiator extension: it takes input from one track for the chords and from another track for the notes, and it maps the notes from the notes track to the available notes from the chords track. It's like a "snap to scale" but it snaps to the current chord.
It's much better than a normal arpeggiator plugin IMHO because you don't have to program patterns in the UI of a plugin; you can do anything in the notes track and it will always work.
The limitation, as with any arpeggiator, is that it can't play notes outside of the current chord (but it's possible to have "chords" with many notes on the chords track to allow more freedom).
One way that I use it is I write a chord progression, then I play over it using the extension, and then I adjust the recording by moving notes to more interesting positions. This song was made this way: https://open.spotify.com/track/5TxVfIf9JUAhCEL3O5cWXT https://open.spotify.com/track/5TxVfIf9JUAhCEL3O5cWXT (It's not perfect and the sound is kind of bad, but it's a start).
- motohagiography 5y agoEdit: your stuff is beautiful btw. Less than an arpegiator, I think it's closer to 1/f or fractal iteration. I've spent the last few days working out a similar hypothesis using a "fractal sequencer" module for my eurorack rig. (https://www.qubitelectronix.com/shop/bloom https://www.qubitelectronix.com/shop/bloom) Essential idea is it takes your sequence of notes, creates a bunch of branches that are essentially folds, and then iterates through them. The track linked is two sequences iterating the 1st 3rd 6th 8th of a scale across two different oscillators creating a kind of bleep-bloopy counterpoint in the background, and then adding a manual three note lead with some drum breaks and drops to tie it together. I wanted to see how different fractal randomness sounded from intentional complexity. (https://soundcloud.com/n-gram-music/beatrice https://soundcloud.com/n-gram-music/beatrice) It's still sounds random'ish because it plods, where a real composer would add intention, emphasis, and ornamentation, but it's still within the domain of clearly musical. I'd say it's based on minimalism and Arvo Part's tintinabuli method, but I think one should be an actual serious musician before making lofty claims like that. (I am not) However, this idea of whether there is a big difference between 1/f fractal complexity in a consonant set of notes, and actual human intent is interesting. I suspect Bach (and before him, Vivaldi) had an underlying system that was based on fractal iterations of each theme, which is what sent me down this (rather nutty) path, but the journey continues to amuse.